” a man who is not only capable of supporting her and her children but has already committed to do so ” could be a sociopath, an abuser, a brute, or just somebody you really don’t like all that much. Women deserve better than a walking bank account with appropriate religious credentials.

Can you tell me what page this is on in Babywise? I’ve used these books loosely and also taken the GKGW class. While I found the Ezzos themselves to be somewhat uptight, I felt that their teaching was wise. What’s ironic to me is, the biggest message I got from Babywise was a “flexible routine”. For some reason, that word “flexible” really stood out to me; yet, oftentimes when this book is mentioned, both on the internet and among friends/acquaintances, the interpretation is often that the book says one must be “rigid” with the schedules. I just don’t see that in the book, and I don’t understand why people read it and think that. I think they clearly position themselves, at least in the secular Babywise book (I haven’t taken the Along the Infant Way Classes to compare), to be taking a middle ground – not the hyperscheduling, only nurse for 3 minutes on each side, every 4 hours advice from the past, but also not the babywearing, cosleeping, demand feeding, nurse every time the baby fusses extreme that Dr. Sears recommends with attachment parenting.

Thanks for clarifying.