Hi, I'm very familiar with BABYWISE, the secular version of PREPARATION FOR PARENTHOOD, which is a religious-based infant parenting curriculum. I have dialogued with the author along with another LC and a former LLL Leader, and I can tell you first hand that the initial breastfeeding advice was based on his and his wife's experience; she was a pediatric nurse for a short time many years ago (before their children were born; their girls now have their own families). When challenged as to the sources for their bfg info, they have no recognized sources. It is most important to realize that the authors believe that babies are born into what they call "metabolic chaos", and need help to gain equilibrium. This help includes fairly scheduled feeds along with scheduled wake, nap, play and cuddle times. The "success" that parents rave the most about is that babies are "trained" to sleep by around 6 wks of age, and when asked why they like the book, most parents will cite this success, along with the "convenience" of the baby fitting into the family, as the most significant accomplishment. For the LC, the most important aspect to recognize is the high risk for milk supply loss and failure-to-thrive in the infant. There have been several cases of FTT that have been documented as being related to use of this method. PREP and BABYWISE, though they now contain more information on how to know that your baby is getting enough, do not have answers for how to help your milk supply if baby isn't doing well on the schedule. Does the MD really want to rely on a book that is poorly referenced as well as connected to FTT situations that have been publicly questioned in a prominent Christian magazine? Is his overall goal for his patients health, or convenience to the parent? They needn't be mutually exclusive. Attachment issues are at stark contrast to what most of us believe. The authors' definition of secure attachment is the ability of the baby to be comfortable with many caregivers from early on; their definition of insecurity is a baby who clings to its mother and cries at separation, fairly irregardless of age. How to address this? If you are dealing with the secular book and not having to deal with religion, I would point out that the author's theories regarding good attachment are at extreme odds with Erickon's works. Indeed, Erickson teaches that the primary task of the infant is to build trust, and that if his needs are not met fairly consistently, he will learn to distrust his world. Adaptation will occur, behavior may be modified to convenience, but the lesson learned may well be distrust instead of trust. Many counselors are concerned about the long-term psychological impact of the "method", especially if undertaken by parents already predisposed to a strongly authoritarian parenting model. Is the doctor ready to take responsibility for psychological damage? How would he feel if he knew that a major Christian college specializing in counseling has grave concerns about the impact of this curriculum and sees it as psychologically unhealthy? These are just a couple of thoughts that I might share, along with perhaps some positive replacements to address the concerns that this doctor was trying to address for his patients and their parents. Personally, I am waiting for the day when one of the "victims" has the courage to stand up and sue for damage that has occurred because the author has refused to acknowledge the problems or risks. When that day comes, this book may no longer be around. -Lisa QUEEN of Ezzo trivia ****************************************************************************** Lisa A. Marasco, IBCLC / [log in to unmask] International Board Certified Lactation Consultant / [log in to unmask] ******************************************************************************