# Have you ever read Ferber?



## wannabe (Jul 4, 2005)

I did today for the first time, and I must say I was pleasantly surprised! Yes, I make a habit of reading scary parenting books. Know your enemy to debate them online is my motto.

I went into it expecting a cross between Ezzo and the antichrist (well, except that Ezzo IS *some things I can't say because it violates the UA. Picture BAAAD things, though*), but it was actually not as bad as half of those slim little "how to starve your baby by three weeks" books that talk about "winning the battle" and other horrid things.

Anyway, of course I didn't even open the chapter on leaving the child to cry, knowing I'd get too upset, and I didn't see anything about feeding. But there is some very sensible and sound *other* stuff in there - for example, how to map your child's sleep/wake patterns and determine THEIR routine, some really quite OK nightweaning things (so long as you don't remember that when he refers you to chapter 4, it's to learn how to abandon them to cry), considering the alternatives out there. And the stuff about how a baby only eeds a certain amount of sleep, and it they sleep for twelve hours at night, you can't expect two two hour naps. He even has a version of the Pantley pull-off!

He's surprisingly OK with feeding to sleep, and with doing anything that works for you. Overall, the bits I read lacked the hysterical brainwashing tone of a lot of sleep books.

So, I just thought I'd post here to tell those who are looking for a variety of ideas about sleep, but would have bypassed this book because of the association with leaving the baby to cry.

I wouldn't recommend it to someone who I didn't know was strong enough to avoid the crying chapter, but I think anyone here just might be able to







:

Has anyone else read it? In my hour in the bookstore did I get an accurate impression?


----------



## EnviroBecca (Jun 5, 2002)

I bought a copy from a used-book store (where buying it meant preventing some innocent parent from falling into its sway, unlike a new-book store where buying it means they stock another copy) and read it, then gave it to my rabbit as a chew-toy.

I agree, it was not as bad as I expected. But I DID read the whole thing, and the chapter about CIO is fairly horrible. Skipping that chapter definitely gives you an inaccurate impression of the book!!


----------



## wannabe (Jul 4, 2005)

LOL, that's how I came by my copy of What to expect when you're expecting.

I had to skip that chapter, you understand - I didn't want nightmares


----------



## Mindful Mom (Jun 9, 2003)

It's funny --- when we lived in Boston, we actually took Zoe to see him (there was some concern that she might have had an actual sleep disorder). Despite having the personality of a pencil eraser, he was actually a resonable man and never once suggested we needed to stop co-sleeping. He gave us some advice for how to improve her sleep while keeping her in the bed, and told us that we could help her learn to sleep better without CIO. The only thing he felt *really* strongly about was that babies only needed as much sleep as they needed and that it was up to the parents to adjust naps and bedtimes in order to consolidate the sleep to work within the family (IOW, don't expect a baby to nap well AND sleep all night if that particular child only needs xx hours of sleep/day). His advice was to keep a detailed sleep journal and bring in back for him to analyze and make suggestions. We ended up not going back -- mostly because we didn't see that he added any more than we already knew and he didn't seem to think there was an actual disorder (he was right -- she was just an uber-high needs baby/toddler).

I actually came out and asked him if he knew that the AP world thought he was the "anit-christ" (not the most tactful thing, I know -- but I was sort of joking when I said it). He didn't really respond (can you blame him?), but he did say that he sees some really horrific sleep disorders and he comes at what he does from the point of wanting to prevent some of the things he sees.

All-in-all -- not my cup of tea, but not the anti-christ. I also believe that, in his own way, he really does think he's doing something good for kids.


----------



## awnja (Sep 1, 2004)

I've read that, like Dr. Spock, he regrets some of what has happened as a result of his book... I'm sure that many authors are ashamed that parents have followed their advice to the T over their own instincts. I think that's a real danger in writing your own opinions about child rearing. Someone may apply those opinions to a child that doesn't apply to that book (what child fits any book?) because its there in black and white. I'll bet there are even parents going *by the book* according to the Sears' Baby Book to whom Dr. Sears himself might say, "lighten up its not the Bible!"

Anyway, no I haven't read Ferber. I was afraid of nightmares too, but now I'm enlighted and won't be scared should I come across the book. Ezzo was in a bookstore and I read a page and a half and became worried about my blood pressure. What I read there basically came sounded to me like its best to completely ignore any motherly instincts. It was weird.


----------



## Dido (Jan 7, 2006)

From what I've read, Weissbluth (Healthy Sleep Habits, Healthy Child) is far worse than Ferber.

I have also seen an article where Ferber was quoted deploring Babywise as barbaric mistreatment.

Not saying I love Ferber - far from it. Just that he's not the worst out there.


----------



## dove (Jun 13, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *wannabe*
I did today for the first time, and I must say I was pleasantly surprised!

uh...I'm sorry, did I...step into the wrong site? uh, can anyone tell me if I'm still on (whispering now) mdc?







:


----------



## wannabe (Jul 4, 2005)

LOL, Dove - did you read the whole post? I don't know about you, but I find that when I can post an informative reply to someone wanting to leave their newborn to cry, I get a much better response. It actually gives you a chance to change their mind, and save the baby. And to be informative, you need the information.

brooklyn, yeah, Weissbluth is really awful, but I didn't get past him encouraging a routine nightly bottle of formula before I had to hide the rest of the stack and take a brisk walk to calm down. You can sum up his helpful nuggets in two phrases - sleep begets sleep, and watching for tired signs after some age-appropriate length of time.


----------



## dove (Jun 13, 2005)

Yes, I read your whole post and the responses.

While I get what you are saying, especially in regards to being able to informatively debate a practice you are against, I am *aghast* at the fact that you are stating you found yourself to be "pleasantly surprised" at what you saw in the book, especially when you admittedly skipped over the part you would personally have the most trouble stomaching.

Same argument for the Weissbluth book. Lots of people say, oh, yeah - it's not all bad. But the thing is, they (both authors) are both into advocating cio and the other info that ppl seem to find useful (such as facts about infant sleep physiology) can be found elsewhere, no cio strings attatched.


----------



## wannabe (Jul 4, 2005)

What's wrong with being pleasantly surprised by something?

I was expecting something along the lines of Babywise. I was very surprised to find some decent bits in there - both advice and basic information. And that it wasn't like Ezzo meant it was a pleasant surprise.

I am hardly posting on a mainstream board, saying "go and read Ferber". That would be downright negligent. I am posting here, amongst people who practice gentle parenting, saying that it has good amongst the bad, and I'm surprised by that. If anyone here is prompted to read it by this post, at least I can be sure they won't start leaving their child to cry. And I'm not prompting them to read it, I'm just making an observation that it seems a couple of other people share.


----------



## dove (Jun 13, 2005)

that's cool (your opinion). I *get* what you are saying and stated that before. I just happen to disagree and wrote why. To write again would just be repeating myself and a waste of time. I will say again, though, that you admitted to not reading the "worst" part of the book, and if you had done so, you may not have come away with a pleasant feeling, as someone else also mentioned above. I'm glad you feel that you have others who support your view, if that is important to you in this cause. I don't want to get in a match over it, just don't understand your motivation for posting this to begin with. If you are wanting to have a discussion with someone who wants to "Ferberize" and you are hoping to sway them in a different direction, you should really read the whole book. It will help you have a more passionate discussion, trust me.


----------



## Dido (Jan 7, 2006)

Dove, I find it odd that you are questioning wannabe's "motivation" and discussing whether others "support her view" or her "cause." It doesn't look to me like she has a cause or was looking for a debate. She picked up a book and had a reaction to it. I'm not surprised she posted about it, b/c Ferber is a name that comes up so often in this forum.

Wannabe, I agree on Weissbluth, although the revised edition doesn't have the formula advice, I think. It does have the oh-so-helpful advice to breastfeed your child no more than 4-5 times a day, though. The biggest difference between Weissbluth and Ferber, it seems to me, is that Weissbluth says there's no limit to the amount of time your child should be left to cry at night (i.e. 5 hours or more is just ducky) and Ferber strictly times the amount of crying time. It's kind of a choice between outright abandonment and obsessively mechanized abandonment.


----------



## dove (Jun 13, 2005)

I personally don't care if anyone finds what i am writing to be odd.
The op posted, I listened, gave my opinion, responded to some things that were mentioned...and that's how a thread goes.

I will restate why I wanted to pop onto this thread. If you find it odd, so be it. If you want to back up the op and say she wasn't asking for a debate, well, that's just dandy with me too.







honestly.

Here's my reason, very plainly stated:

You can obtain information about normal infant and child sleep physiology without even reading a book by Ferber, Ezzo, Weissbluth, etc...and why state on MDC that Ferber's book was "a pleasant surprise" when one is unwilling to read the most controversial parts of the book (cio and feeding)???

Just doesn't make sense to me...so I felt the need to express myself and speak out. I don't think we should be advocating for these books, however indirectly ("pleasantly surprised", "not the worst of the worst", etc) that may seem. If someone would just stumble onto this thread, they might be like "oh, cool - mdc mamas will support my use of Ferberizing"...


----------



## wannabe (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrklynMama*
It's kind of a choice between outright abandonment and obsessively mechanized abandonment.









I love it! Can I quote you?

Dove, often when people post saying "I'm going to ferberise my baby" they preface it with the actual issue they're facing. If you can post a reply BASED on Ferber that explains why it's not a good idea, or offers alternatives BASED on Ferber, then it's many times more powerful than simply saying "that's mean, read Sears". Because you're not putting yourself in opposition with them and getting their back up, you're saying "hey, look; I read the actual book he wrote, and he says that you could try this, or this, and the reasons might be this". They are far more likely to listen, and think twice, or even take your advice.

For example, how often have you seen people say "No baby over six months needs to eat at night, it's just habit, I'm going to CIO tonight". Ferber actually advises against CIO in that situation. The method he proposes is a thousand times kinder, so if I can suggest that instead, isn't that better for the baby? And by suggesting that, I can slip in an even kinder alternative, which might help someone else.


----------



## dove (Jun 13, 2005)

I understand your approach, and it is admirable.

My thoughts are lost in this thread, however - so carry on!


----------



## AmieV (Mar 31, 2005)

I have definitely NOT found a book that better details infant sleep physiology than Weissbluth, however horrifying the rest of it may be. Perhaps you could suggest some? The Pantley book was a bit of a joke on that part to me. Honestly it seemed in places that she was paraphrasing Weissbluth, and poorly at that.


----------



## Dido (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmieV*
I have definitely NOT found a book that better details infant sleep physiology than Weissbluth, however horrifying the rest of it may be. Perhaps you could suggest some? The Pantley book was a bit of a joke on that part to me. Honestly it seemed in places that she was paraphrasing Weissbluth, and poorly at that.

Dr. Sears's Baby Sleep Book seems to have plenty of sleep physiology to it, and to me it's far more convincingly "scientific," because he includes studies about the positive effects of the family bed. A book on sleep physiology that does not address the fact that babies are biologically designed to sleep with their mothers is to me deficient and casts doubt on the credibility of the other information.


----------



## Dido (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *wannabe*







I love it! Can I quote you?

By all means! I'm honored!

My favorite rebuff to the Ferberites, though, is the movie Meet the Fockers! Anyone else seen it?


----------



## Gem'sMama (Aug 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmieV*
I have definitely NOT found a book that better details infant sleep physiology than Weissbluth, however horrifying the rest of it may be.

I f







king hate Weissbluth so much




























. He is







. I stupidly bought his horrible book when my daughter was a couple months old. I didn't know it had stuff about CIO. I was in the midst of ppd and she was a terrible sleeper. This book made things so much worse. It scared the crap out of me. All those boxes with "Warning" stating some nonsense about if I didn't get her the proper amount of sleep she was going to have ADD and grow up to be an adult insomniac hooked on sleeping pills. Basically he argues that you are doing long term permanent damage to your baby if they are not napping in their crib at 9am 1pm and down for 12 hours at night and you are to get them that sleep at all costs. Let the little twits cry all night long if need be, he argues. Cry their little eyes out till they vomit and fall asleep. Oh, and he says you are really doing them a favor by giving them this "gift" of learning to sleep on their own. Well forget you Weissbluth! Leave me and my ADD insomniac baby alone! He said that a baby's sleep patterns could cause maternal depression. Well his horrible book worsened mine with all those warnings and scare tactics. Whew! I feel better now.

I read the revised Ferber and the original version as well. He definitely changed his tune on some things, sounding a bit more accepting of some AP practices. I agree with the OP that he is not as bad as I had heard. Whether or not I agree whith his methods, he does sound like he genuinely cares about babies and children unlike Weissbluth who hates babies and children. He had some good info on sleep patterns and such. When I read this thread I really didn't understand dove's point and thought she was taking things a bit too seriously. Then I wondered how I would feel if someone suggested Weissbluth wasn't that bad and I kinda understood dove's point.


----------



## LandonsMom (Jul 22, 2005)

Someone (from LLL of all places) just recomended Weissbluth to me, and while I was not horrified at the first crack, and actually became encouraged by some of the biological sleep information and how maybe ds isnt getting enough sleep, I am outraged that he states (generally) that sleep is important to the family unit and that it may be necessary to IGNORE one members cried in order to accomplish sleep. Many of his patient stories recalled feeling like it was wrong at first. SO basically they just numbed themselves after hearing HOURS of crying. ASOLUTELY NOT happening in this house! I was also very put off as well by his recommendations involving formula even after he clearly stated that what your feeding your baby will not affect their nightwaking status. I found opinion based contradictions all over this book.

The sad thing is this stupid book had me second guessing my parenting choices and I've been around mostly AP my whole life! Imagine what it would do to a new mom who didnt have any strong convictions one way or another.

I dont believe I'll be able to finish the book, and I dont belive I'll be able to give it back to the person who gave it to me with out respectfully sharing my opinion!


----------



## Gem'sMama (Aug 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LandonsMom*
I dont believe I'll be able to finish the book, and I dont belive I'll be able to give it back to the person who gave it to me with out respectfully sharing my opinion!

If you haven't finished it, please don't. Only bad can come of it, especially if you have already found that you are second guessing yourself. I can't believe someone from LLL recommended it to you. I guess Weissbluth is very crafty by pretending to support breastfeeding and cosleeping in order to sucker AP folks in, but all of his advice goes completely against AP practices. Wow, I should stop now before I start on another I Hate Weissbluth rant. I just can't help myself sometimes. I'm sorry you ever had to read even part of this horrific and dangerous book. I hope you do share your opinion with the person who lent it to you. Maybe you could just tell her you accidentally lost it







, meaning you really let your baby tear out all the pages and then throw it away so no one else ever gets their hands on it, which is what I did. Oh yeah, and about what this thread was originally about, good ol' Ferber, he's not as horrific but still unacceptable.


----------



## jaidymama (Jun 18, 2005)

About the OP's question... I was curious if this new book was better than the old one... truly up to date, and more AP than before... a friend of mine recently was given the book... I was totally in shock because I had known of all the horrible advice this guy has given. So I want to know... truly... is this new book worth it? Or is Ferber just trying to piggyback on what most AP parents have known for generations. Ug.

Has anyone read his old book and compared it with his newer book? It's my understanding he retracted his support of CIO? I guess if he has a chapter about CIO in this book, then he must still support it. I guess it's just one more book out there to avoid.


----------



## Gem'sMama (Aug 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jaidymama*
About the OP's question... I was curious if this new book was better than the old one... truly up to date, and more AP than before... a friend of mine recently was given the book... I was totally in shock because I had known of all the horrible advice this guy has given. So I want to know... truly... is this new book worth it? Or is Ferber just trying to piggyback on what most AP parents have known for generations. Ug.

Has anyone read his old book and compared it with his newer book? It's my understanding he retracted his support of CIO? I guess if he has a chapter about CIO in this book, then he must still support it. I guess it's just one more book out there to avoid.

Like I said in an earlier post in this thread, I have read both versions. I would not say the new version is "more AP" than the old, just that the new book is a bit more supportive of some AP practices such as colseeping and breastfeeding, but not really an AP book. Ferber did NOT retract his support of CIO, or as he calls it "Progressive Waiting." He did retract his stance on colseeping. He says its ok now. In the first version he basically said you should have your head examined if you want to sleep with your baby. So anyway, I agree with the OP that yeah the new book is less dogmatic than other sleep books, yeah it has some good sleep info, yeah there are some kind-to-baby techniques, yeah it has a sort of whatever works for you vibe, and yeah Ferbs is not the antichrist baby-hater I thought he was. However, unlike the OP though, I could not in good conscience recommend the new book to anyone simply for the fact that he does include the Progressive Waiting aka Cry It Out technique. Its a deal breaker for me, even if I thought the person was I was recommending to "was strong enough to avoid the crying chapter," like the OP said. Frankly, when someone is sleep deprived and vulnerable, they may just not be strong enough. The fact that the book may seem rational and kind overall makes the CIO part all the more insidious. Just my opinion.


----------



## LandonsMom (Jul 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Gem'sMama*
.... I hope you do share your opinion with the person who lent it to you. Maybe you could just tell her you accidentally lost it







, meaning you really let your baby tear out all the pages and then throw it away so no one else ever gets their hands on it, which is what I did. ....









I'm seriously considering this! DS does love to tear the pages out of ANY book! This one wouldnt bother me at all!!


----------

