On Becoming Baby Wise: Giving Your Infant the Gift of Nighttime Sleep

(Nora) #1

Conflict Between the Variable and Constant


(^) The greatest tension with feeding philosophies centers on which feeding
indicator to use—the variable of the hunger cue or the constant of the
clock. The standard Attachment Parenting/La Leche League doctrine
insists on child-led feedings exclusively, thus, the hunger cue is
dominant. The hyper-schedulist sees the fixed segments of time as the
final determinant of feeding. Thus, the clock is dominant. Where does the
healthy truth rest? Not at either extreme. The weakness in logic of these
two views becomes obvious when placed into their respective equations.
The child-led feeding equation looks like this:
Hunger Cue + Nothing = Feeding Time


Weakness in practice:



  1. The child-led feeding is based on the faulty assumption that the hunger
    cue is always reliable. It isn’t. Hunger cues only work if the hunger cues
    are present. Weak, sickly, sluggish, or sleepy babies may not signal for
    food for four, five or six hours. So exclusive cue feeding puts them at risk
    of not receiving proper nourishment. If the cue is not present, the baby
    doesn’t get fed.

  2. If the cue is consistently less than two hours, it leads to maternal
    fatigue. Fatigue is recognized as the number one reason for mothers


giving up breast-feeding.^5 Exclusive cue-response feeding can easily lead
to infant dehydration, low weight gain, failure to thrive, and frustration


for both baby and mom.^6



  1. The inconsistency of cue feeding also discourages the establishment of
    healthy sleep patterns as we will demonstrate later.


The Clock-feeding equation looks like this:

Free download pdf