An Evaluation of the

II.

The Overall Observation

2000 Dr. Kent McClain’s Observation

The following are my general observations of parenting challenges, The GFI program, and individual parent responsibility with any parenting program.

1. The GFI program seems to be gaining popularity with many church families around the country. This is not surprising since many Christian parents are looking for practical suggestions for raising their children. These are nervous times for parents who see many of today’s undisciplined youth disregard adult authority, disrespect classroom teachers, disdain the laws of the land, and gravitate toward drugs, alcohol, and sexual experimentation.

2. Christian parents want answers, and in response many Christian family life leaders have tried to respond in part through Christian parenting books, conferences, and radio broadcasts. But as one parent stated months ago, “It’s too difficult to run from one author to the other trying to find answers, and the expense of each book, or conference is prohibitive.”

3. In response, the Ezzo’s put together a program (GFI) that is well organized, relatively inexpensive, and easy to follow. The Ezzo’s are to be commended for the effort. They have resurrected from our past educational philosophies some excellent principles which, even though they may be behavioristic at points, can be helpful with certain children at different ages. Some of these principles can even be supported by Scripture (Eph. 6:4.)

4. As an example, (Session #5, GKGW, “The Father’s Mandate”), Gary Ezzo teaches in a video session some great principles about the role of a father. He points out how important it is for a father to allow freedom to fail as long as an effort is made. His relationship with his daughters seems commendable in this session of discovery.

5. What is the reason for concern? Since there are some positives in the program in a culture that desperately needs rules and guidance in parenting and the program is growing in popularity, why criticize the Ezzo’s parenting program? In fact, many have said to me, “Let each Christian parent choose out of the program what is good or not for his own children.” Each time I heard this comment, I prayerfully took a step back, delaying my evaluation. But I equally heard from many parents who have had great difficulties with the program and poor results. In response to those comments I continued to step forward with this analysis.

6. The hope in this current (July, 2000) analysis is that you establish a discerning basis when applying any program that will effect the raising of your children. Not surprisingly, faithful Christians are not always right on every issue. 2000 years of church history have proven that. How many denominations do we have today, because one biblical issue or approach could not be agreed upon by fellow Christians?

7. You are responsible! No matter how you respond to my analysis, ultimately, you are the one responsible for raising the children God has given you. Follow the Scripture, it is your greatest written ally from God. As parents of two faithful servants of God (a 24 year old boy & an 21 year old girl,) all the parenting programs in the world pale in comparison to the plan we followed, which was a daily commitment to pray, obey, and seek the advice from other Christian parents who traveled the trail before.

III.

Four Areas

Concern

“Then you will understand what is right and just and fair-every good path. For wisdom will enter your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul. Discretion will protect you, and understanding will guard you.” - Proverbs 2:9-11

This section is a brief overview of the four areas of concern that should be considered before using any of the Growing Families International programs on parenting. More detail will be added to these concerns in Section IV. The areas of concern and their descriptions are as follows:

1) Missing Biblical Cornerstones

The program, which purports to be God’s plan for raising children, fails to cover essential biblical teachings such as: the knowledge of redemption/salvation, how to walk by faith, the exercise of prayer, family devotions,etc.

2) Mishandling of Scripture - Fact vs. Opinion

It is difficult to distinguish between the Ezzos’ opinions, actual fact, and biblical principle. They periodically create the impression that their own ideas of parenting are Scriptural, when they may not be.

3) Presence of Legalism

The program has a tendency of making parenting applications more significant than the biblical context allows. The material routinely moralizes parenting suggestions forcing decisions to be either biblically right and wrong.

4) Questionable Views of Child Development

The materials display a questionable understanding of child development.

Many of the discipline suggestions are not age appropriate.

IV.

Data Supporting Four Areas of Concern

Concern # 1

Missing Biblical Cornerstones

The parenting program is named Growing Kids God’s Way, which may give the program participant the idea that this is a complete, biblical program in raising children. It is not! The program focuses primarily on discipline. Some teachings on discipline have biblical roots and some do not. Discipline is important; the Bible speaks on it. However, there are other issues which are missed that are equally more important.

That is not to say a program guiding parents in child discipline is not needed in our society. But it is very possible that this program has missed the greatest goal in Christian parenting. The greatest goal is to lead a child to a saving knowledge of Christ (redemption). Without the redemption of a child, what would it matter whether children responded to discipline in the home or not? Without such instruction and response they would spend their lives on earth and in eternity without the presence of God.

God’s plan to redeem man is one of the overriding themes of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. This program gives little or no attention to it. If this were a program teaching parents how to raise children according to a biblical plan, then at least one major section would be devoted to the redemption of a child. Teaching redemption is so important in the Bible that Jesus spent one third of his teaching ministry training the disciples in redemption. How can the GKGW program be God’s plan in raising children if the redemption of a child is not a major issue? What about the subjects of prayer, faith, and the Word; where are these teaching sections in this parenting program?

In courtesy to the Ezzos, I believe they would like all children in their program to come to a saving knowledge of Christ, but their goals in parenting mistakenly miss this important element. It would better serve this program to include these areas or rename the program: “Growing Kids in Discipline According to Gary and Ann Marie Ezzo.”

The following page is the Ezzo’s “Subject Index” (GKGW) for raising children according to God’s plan. Discover for yourself what is missing, and ask is this truly God’s way of raising children? Enclosed in the box are the biblical priorities that I feel are essential to a Christian parenting program. It would be impossible to title a parenting program Growing Kids God’s Way without these priorities.

Concern #2

Mishandling of Scripture

Although there are over 1700 references referring to children in the Bible, only a few directly apply to parenting advice and application. In response to this limitation of Scripture dealing directly with parenting as a subject in the Bible, three questions need to be posed to the Ezzos concerning their use of Scripture.

Question #1

Is the Ezzos Scriptural approach for establishing their parenting theories biblically applicable or accurate?

Since the Ezzos claim their program is a biblical view of parenting, then great discernment must be applied in respect to the Scripture they use to establish their parenting principles. In my opinion some key Scriptures used in the program have been mishandled and stretched out of context in order to validate the Ezzo’s opinion of parenting. It seems as though the Ezzos predetermined their parenting principles and then carelessly aligned them with what they thought were related Scriptures. Some of the Scriptures are not as related as they seem, as the Creation and Cross accounts in this part of the analysis will prove. (See Fact or Opinion-page 14; Focus on the Family evaluation-page 28; Christianity Today’s evaluation-page 32).

The following passages of Scripture that in my opinion are either taken out of context or misapplied. In all, there are over 70 references of Scripture that need to be looked at carefully, before a biblical mandate is applied.

· Out of context verses occurs when the Scripture reference is taken out of its setting to prove a parenting application. Thus, the validity of the parenting application cannot alone stand on this particular Scripture.

· Misapplication occurs when the parenting application used could be valid, but not in context with the passage of Scripture being used. The resolve is to use other Scriptures that directly deal with the context of the parenting principle being advocated. This disciplined method of analysis maintains the integrity of each passage of Scripture, and effects a more accurate application.

Scriptures in Question

Growing Kids God’s Way Manual

(Analyzed by John Pruitt: church elder)

1. Page 9 Ephesians 3:20 Possible Misapplication

2. Page 10 I Samuel 16:7 Possible Misapplication

3. Page 16 II Cor. 5:18-20 Possible Misapplication

4. Page 16 I Peter 1:16 Possible Misapplication

5. Page 16 Proverbs 17:28 Possible Misapplication

6. Page 18 I Cor. 13:11, Matt. 18:3 Possible Misapplication

7. Page 21-22 I Cor. 14:33 Possible Misapplication

8. Page 25 Proverbs 4:23 Possible Misapplication

9. Page 29 Phil. 3:13 Possible Misapplication

10. Page 36 Matt. 28:19-20 Possible Misapplication

11. Page 36 I Peter 3:2,16 Possible Misapplication

12. Page 37 Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11; Possible Misapplication

James 2:1-10

13. Page 39 Proverbs 3:3-4 Possible Misapplication

14. Page 50 I. Cor. 3:16 Out of Context

15. Page 98 Jn. 17:17, Matt. 7:24-27 Out of Context

16. Page 103 Acts 23:1 Possible Misapplication

17. Page 104 Rom. 1:18-21, 2:14-15; Possible Misapplication

Ps. 119:11

18. Page 107 Ex. 20:14, Matt. 5:28 Possible Misapplication

19. Page 108 Psalm 119:11 Possible Misapplication

20. Page 109 2 Sam. 24:10 Possible Misapplication

21. Page 111 Col. 3:16 Possible Misapplication

(Sin is not issue in this verse)

22. Page 122 Phil. 2:3 Possible Misapplication

23. Page 124 Eph. 6:1-4 Possible Misapplication

24. Page 127 Rom. 1:29-30, 2:2 Possible Misapplication

25. Page 128 Gal. 3:24 Possible Misapplication

26. Page 131 Prov. 4:1-7, Jn 15:15 Possible Misapplication

27. Pg. 141-142* Matt. 27:26 Possible Misapplication

*PFP Manual

28. Page 161 Rom. 8:19-22 Possible Misapplication

29. Page 172 Heb. 12:11 Possible Misapplication

30. Page 185 Pro. 29:15b; 1:8-9; 22:15a Possible Misapplication

31. Page 186 1 Peter 1:16 Out of Context

32. Page 188 Prov. 15:23; 25:11 Possible Misapplication

33. Page 201 Deut. 8:5, II Sam. 7:14; Out of Context

Pro. 19:18; Heb. 12:67; Heb. 12:6-7; Rev. 3:19

34. Page 209 Prov. 22:6 Possible Misapplication

35. Page 267 Prov. 22:15 Possible Misapplication

36. Page 272 John 13:34-35 Out of Context

37. Page 274 Heb. 11:6 Out of Context

38. Page 277 Titus 3:8 Out of Context

39. Page 301 Pro. 20:11 Possible Misapplication

40. Page 311 Pro. 19:18 Possible Misinterpretation

Question #2

Is there evidence of Scriptural misapplication specifically explained n this evaluation?

In one of the parenting theories, the program determined that the husband and wife relationship hold the highest priority in the family. Regardless of age, children should not be allowed to disturb or alter the husband-wife relationship. If there is a center of attention in the family, it should not be with the children, but the husband and wife.

Quotes from the GKGW manual (pg. 63-64)

“. . . marriage is the priority relationship, all other relationships must be subject to it.”

“Often parents leave their first love, each other, and focus extensively on their children. Although this may be done in the name of good parenting, it is the first step to the break up of family relationship.”

“Parents who center their entire world around the nurture of children are child-centered.”

“Child-centered parenting attacks the husband-wife relationship by reducing its biblical significance.”

The Ezzos Creation Parenting Principle Misapplication

Whether you agree with the view of the husband and wife priority or not, the disturbing fact remains that the Creation account was their biblical basis for making such an assertion on parenting. The Ezzos attempt a lengthy explanation trying to make this work, first claiming that there was a concept of dependency inherent in all creation (pg. 63, GKGW.) According to them, what God created on the second day was dependent on the first day. Therefore, what was created on the first day had priority over the second day. Since the husband and wife were created first in the Garden, their relationship superseded that of the children. What they are trying to work toward in this biblical analysis is to abandon the practice of making the children the center of family nurturing. As you read pages 63-65 in GKGW, ask yourself, how did I get from the Creation account to the concept of not being child centered in my parenting?

The creation account doesn’t hide any secret messages, it simply records God’s creation of the world in Genesis 1-3. The messages is very clear: 1) God created Adam and Eve in His likeness, 2) God gave Adam and Eve a paradise to live in, 3) God allowed them to be tempted by Satan, 4) God rescued Adam and Eve when they sinned, and 5) God set in motion a plan of redemption for Adam and Eve and the world that followed. There is no teaching within the context about the priority of the husband-wife relationship that deters parents from being too child centered in their parenting. In fact there is no other passage of Scripture, including those that deal directly with parental advice, that even infers such a concept. That doesn’t mean the advice is not good or workable, but it is not biblical.

Dr. McClain’s Adam and Eve Parenting Principle Misapplication

In order to briefly illustrate my point further, I will take the same Creation account (Gen. 1-3) to establish my own parenting principle, which I will call the Adam and Eve Parenting Principle. I believe this principle (“tongue in cheek”) is biblically inspired, logical, and guide worthy. From the outset, I will tell you that I cannot use this as a biblical mandate, because it is a parenting principle I devised while reading the Word, not one that came directly from the Word. It is a biblical inspiration not a biblical principle.

Since the Trinity (God the Father, Son, & Spirit) are the perfect parents of us all, then Christian parents should treat their children in the same way that Adam and Eve (Mankind’s infant beginnings) were treated in the Garden. Adam and Eve were the center of the Trinity’s thoughts and efforts. An entire world was created around them, they were in God’s image, and there was nothing God didn’t do for them. He gave them a protective Garden to live in, and then granted them the freedom of choice. When they failed in that choice, God rescued them, and established a plan of redemption for them and all of mankind. As centuries passed, mankind was given progressively more knowledge and opportunities to trust God. The greatest parenting act of all time was when God sent His own son to save His beloved, but rebellious children. In the midst of all this Godly parenting, never once does the Trinity debate the importance of man. Man was the center of their attention, and so should children be at the center of each parent’s attention. That is what I refer to as the Adam and Eve Principle of Parenting, which I was biblically inspired by to use in my own parenting. Is not a biblical principle in Scripture; the context does not allow this.

Whether you agree with the GFI’s inspired teaching on the Creation account or mine, realize neither one interprets the context, therefore the application may or may not be biblically valid.

Question #3

Is there Fact vs. Opinion confusion in the GFI parenting program?

Another complication in the GFI parenting program is the intermixing of fact and opinion. In many cases the Ezzos have some good opinions on parenting and give reasonable advice. In the PFP Program, they list some specific suggestions on determining the reason behind a baby’s cry. Some of those suggestions are:

1) Listen for the type of cry (dirty diaper, trapped gas, illness)

2) Think about your baby’s routine. Is nap time over, has he/she been in the swing too long? (pg. 153, PFP.)

The confusion comes when the Ezzos make the mistaken effort to add biblical support to their parenting opinions. Biblical support that is often taken out of context. In response, many Christians will faithfully adopt these parenting opinions as biblical fact because they are purported to come from the inspired and inerrant Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16). Once again let me emphasize, the Ezzo’s parenting opinions may be helpful, but many cannot be used as applications from the Scriptures chosen.

An example the Ezzos incorrectly used Christ’s travail at the cross as a biblical basis for delaying a response to a baby’s cry. As the manual records, “Our heavenly Father’s non-intervention to His Son’s cry at that moment was the right response. . . it is used to demonstrate that God does not always respond to cry-cues immediately and without thought.” (Page 142, Prepared Parenting Manual.) The travail at the cross had nothing to do with delayed response to a child’s cry.

Ezzos’ moral approach

In the final lectures of the series GKGW, I was relieved to hear Gary Ezzo finally claim that some of his parenting principles did not always have a biblical basis. Perhaps this was said to answer recent criticism, I do not know. But then he corrected himself by stating they did have a moral basis. As an example in lesson 8 on character development, The Child Interrupt Rule was not a biblical principle, but a moral mandate. You cannot have a moral mandate without a biblical foundation. The Bible amongst many things is the moral center and foundation, a document behind all moral decision making.

Concern # 3

Presence of Legalism

Even though the Ezzos openly reject legalism in parenting, they are often guilty of using this approach in many of their parenting applications. The following list defining legalism comes from the Ezzos’ own definition on page 52-53 in the GKGW manual.

1 Legalism creates prohibitions by elevating a method over biblical principle.

2 Whenever someone wants to lower the standard, he is the first to call those who keep the standard, legalists.

3 The legalists see all decisions in life as either black (immoral) or white (moral.) He or she acknowledges no gray areas.

4 The most notable aspect of a legalist is this: he rejects context. Considering context guards against legalism.

5 When there is no direct or indirect prohibition in Scripture, you have a “gray area.” To bind the believer based on the gray areas of life contradicts the Apostle Paul’s teaching to accept that “one man esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind.” (Rom. 14:15)

Throughout the Ezzos’ applications of parenting principles there are often great leaps between what a Scripture teaches in context and the application drawn. The Ezzos take a potentially good idea, and try to insure it with a biblical mandate which becomes a moral decision. The Ezzos take the commandment, “Thou Shalt Not Steal” (given to Moses at Mt. Sinai) as the Scriptural text and basis for returning a grocery store shopping cart to its original position after use. The Ezzos move from the command, “Thou Shalt Not Steal,” to an application that infers the violator (the one who doesn’t return the cart) is immoral, and unholy in the eyes of God.

In the manual GKGW, it says:

“You create these feelings in others each time you abandon your shopping cart. The context makes the act immoral.” (pg. 157, GKGW)

“When you are finished taking your groceries to the car, do you return your shopping cart to the appropriate place? Men and women who live by biblical ethics should not leave their shopping cart squeezed between two cars.” (pg. 156, GKGW)

The inference of not being holy for violating this shopping cart principle does not appear in the manual, but in the Ezzo’s video presentation. And even that can be confusing, because the Ezzos state that if there is a conflict between what is said in a conference and what appears in the manual, the manual is the final authority. But the power of influence of what the Ezzos teach lies in the tapes. For this reason, I will transcribe the portion of his teaching, word for word, in order to give you the full context of what was taught using the shopping cart illustration. As you read this transcript, you review the five things Ezzo defined as legalism, and ask does he violate his own teaching? Is the application elevated above the context? The legalist sees all things in black and white (moral and immoral.) Do the Ezzos make a moral issue out of a shopping cart? The legalist disregards context in making an application; do the Ezzos disregard this context, “Thou Shalt Not Steal,” in order to establish a parenting principle engulfing a shopping cart? The Ezzos support the idea that where there is no direct or indirect prohibition of Scripture then you have a gray area, which is okay. Is the parenting principle of returning a shopping cart a gray area or is it black and white (moral or immoral?) In order for it to qualify as a moral issue, it cannot have any exceptions.

Gary Ezzo speaking:

“We have a natural propensity to substitute our value system for the value system of other people. (Serious tone to the voice) We are going to put our value, (repeat) our value, on their property, and then we make a judgment with our own children. I usually demonstrate this by using the shopping cart analogy. . .ladies and gentlemen, the question you have to answer is how much value does a shopping cart have to you? Right!~I mean you know, the shopping cart that you go shopping with, that you put your groceries in, that you go out to your car with. Here’s a better question, how much value does that shopping cart have to its owner? That’s the legitimate question. How much value does that shopping cart have to its owner? Now ladies and gentlemen, when you go shopping you fill up your cart,. . . you take it out of the store, you take it up to the car, . . you unload your groceries. Listen very carefully,. . .what do you do with your cart? Yes, I hear, I hear, I hear the guilt (laughter from audience). What do you do with your cart? Do you, ladies and gentlemen leave your cart (serious tone in voice) right there?

No! because Christians don’t do that (sarcasm intended).

What do Christians do? (serious tone now) Christians who do not live in mediocrity,. . . Christians who live by a higher standard, (high pitched tone in voice). . .Christians who are other oriented, Christians who recognize the preciousness of others,. . . Christians who recognize the property values. These Christians take their shopping cart back to the front of the store. And then your kids say, “mommy, what are you doing, nobody else does that?” Because we are Christians and this is right, this is right (crescendo building). Yea!. . . this is right!. . . You guys know the experience, your dominion sensor goes off. You are driving around ladies, and you are looking,. . or gentlemen,. . you are looking for a parking spot; finally you find one; you see it,. . . it’s over there,. . you see a space between a couple of cars, and you begin to pull in and there’s 2 or 3 shopping carts there,. . and then you get upset. Now that’s all right, one of those are mine from last week (audience laughs). Yea, you get upset, your dominion sensor goes off. You begin to think, who would do something like this?. . . And then on a windy day, when the carts are pushed against your car. You think, doesn’t anyone have any consideration?

A question to you. . .? Is that you? (serious tone) Listen, ladies and gentlemen, I’ve worked this out in conjunction with the

Holy Spirit (hard to figure if Ezzo meant this, but laughter came from audience) The next time you go shopping,. . . the next time you go shopping (repeat), and you take your cart out to the side of the car, and you unload your groceries and when you begin to let go of that cart, thinking I’m going to leave it here, let someone else serve me. Ladies and gentlemen, see this face! My face is going to appear, if you leave that cart. (laughter) I will be your guilt, you can drive away, but my face is going to be right there. You are going to have to stop your car, go back and get that cart and put it back in front of that store. Ladies and gentlemen, I guarantee you, I will promise you... if you’ve never done this before,. . . this is going to be a new experience, a new standard for you, and legitimately so. Because your heart is going to be confirmed, your heart is going to be confirmed (repeat) to the fact that your heart has lived to the standard you have received according to a value system that sees the preciousness of others. You have not operated on your value system, you’ve operated on the value system that owns that cart. It’s thrilling to be able to do something morally beautiful. For no other reason other than, it’s right! Go ahead and try it, ladies and gentlemen. Do you know what taking your shopping cart back is? It’s ‘boot camp’ Christianity; taking your shopping cart back,. . . in fact,. . . in that moment. . . Get this!. . . I Peter 1:16 ‘Be ye holy for I am holy.’ You say, taking back a shopping car? How can that be holy? Because in that moment you have agreed with God, not only in your heart, but because of your actions”. (Transcript of Tape - 1993 4th edition)

So how did you feel, at the end of this interpretation? Does taking your shopping cart reflect one of the key commandments of God given to Moses? Or would taking the shopping cart home, keeping it for your own personal use, or selling it for profit be reflective of the commandment? The parenting principle of being respectful of others is good, but is does not carry with it a moral mandate that leaves you unholy and riddled with this kind of approach, and if you are going to use some of their suggestions, then please consider the context of Scripture they advocate. If you are not sure, ask your local pastor, elder, or established Bible teacher for help.

Examples Of Possible Legalistic Parenting Practices In The Ezzo Program

The following are 10 examples of the Ezzos’ parenting applications that can easily practiced legalistically. Most of these were drawn out of the character development lessons 8, 9, and 10.

1. Opening Statement: “Everything that we Tape 6, Lesson 9

teach is based on a moral model. All that we teach

in GKGW gives certain Bible ethics in

dealing with relationship.”

2. Mr. and Mrs. title application: calling parents Page 41 GKGW

by first name is dishonoring authority, a break

down of the commandment, “Honor thy mother

and father.”

3. Buffet Line Illustration: First in line at buffet Video Tape Session 8

restaurant; not honoring to elderly, not good

moral behavior, not biblically ethical, not honoring

to God.

4. The Interrupt Rule: “Don’t let them interrupt.” Video Tape Session 8

This is not a biblical principle but is a moral issue.

5. Family Witness: If you are not orderly with Session 8 Character Develop.

your children as with the interrupt rule, you hurt

your family witness. So if the interrupt rule is not in

place, the spread of the kingdom is damaged by

your family witness.

6. Shyness Example: Parents should not allow Video Tape Session 8

shyness as an excuse not to be courteous.

7. Respect for pianos: Parents enter Church Video Tape Session 8,

Sanctuary, banging on piano, running around. Character Develop.

“Where is their morality, where is their biblical

ethics?”

8. K-Mart Store: Someone interrupts line and Video Tape Session 8

asks question out of order! The dominion of Character Develop.

others rule is violated.

9. Party next door: Leaving junk on lawn after party Video Tape Session 8,

violates dominion of others, which is morally wrong 9, 10

10. “We believe the best evaluation of any parenting Page 20 GKGW

philosophy is found in the overall results.”

*End doesn’t justify means

Other Areas of Apparent Legalistic Application

Page 10 The heart of a child

Page 127 Allegiance

Page 140 Interrupt Rule

Page 143 Titles

Page 170 First Time Obedience

Page 214 Grace Issue

Page 281 Childishness

Page 301 Outward Appearances

Page 22 Order

Concern # 4

Questionable Views of Child Development

There seems to be an inaccurate assumption of what children can absorb in their first few months of life. The Ezzo’s disciplinary expectations of young children are bothersome at times. In lesson 10 (GKGW) on obedience, the Ezzos felt that 8-9 months was not too soon for a first time (no second chance) obedience response. This first time response was called the 10% rule, which meant that not even 10% of non-compliance was acceptable. A child of 8-9 months could be expected to comply 100% with the demands of a parent. In establishing this point, the Ezzos used their 9 month old granddaughter, Ashley, as an example of establishing first time obedience. Evidently, in order for her to get out of the high chair she would arch her back to communicate her request to get down. Even though she could not verbally communicate at this point in her development, this was not an acceptable form of communication to the Ezzos. So, through a discipline system of isolating her, she was taught to use the more acceptable hand signals. This discipline was initiated because the Ezzos determined that the arching of the back was not a communication, but rebellion. So, at 9 months old she was disciplined into a new form of communication, demanding 100% obedience.

The following chart lists some acceptable age range expectations.

Dynamic Parenting Key Issues (Authored and published by David Fergeson)

Developmental Issues (Infancy 0-18 months)

· Limited motor activity but very active senses. . .especially hearing, touch, sight

· Judgments made as to the world being “safe” or “unsafe” especially relationships

· Judgments made are primarily related to whether basic needs for food, comfort, nurture are met

Practical Suggestions

· Provide visual stimulation and soothing talk and music

· Nurture-nurture-nurture with touch, talk, and holding

· Lovingly and consistently meet basic needs with gentleness rather than anger

Developmental Issues (Early childhood 18 months - 3 years)

· Rapid development of motor, verbal, and language skills

· Autonomy needed in feeding and controlling elimination

· Approval of parents/significant others very important

Practical Suggestions

· Stimulate motor development in walking, running, throwing, climbing, etc.

· Read-read to you child; Bible stories, nursery rhymes, songs

· Provide a safe environment in which to “explore”

Developmental Issues (Middle Childhood 3-5 years)

· Sense of competence comes out of freedom to undertake personally meaningful activities

· Inquisitive, fantasize and develop a functioning conscience

· Desire to differentiate from others . . . my, mine

Practical Suggestions

· Encourage and praise “favorite” activities and interests the child enjoys; experience Bible songs, videos, games

· Talk about feelings as you see sadness, frustration, fear, rejection - i.e., develop a feeling “vocabulary”

· Encourage social interactions with other children. . . at home, church, preschool

Developmental Issues (Late Childhood 6-12)

· “Industry” is to set and attain personal goals

· Social skills have heightened importance in rules, roles, sharing, and sexual differences

· Capacity to reason develops and desire to be “useful”

Practical Suggestions

· Find families with children the age of yours. . . initiate positive family friendships (i.e., positive peers)

· Explore and encourage hobbies, abilities, and talents

· Identify and praise personal responsibility and unique character qualities

Summary Comments Regarding Ezzo’s Child Development Practices

The Ezzos’ parenting program often makes parenting suggestions that are not age appropriate or biblical. My suggestion is for parents to follow three basic guidelines: 1) Refrain from using a lot of discipline with infants; that doesn’t mean you are a permissive parent; God gave all His people a lot of grace in the beginning years of their faith; do likewise, 2) Know your child and his/her strengths, weaknesses, and levels of understanding as they apply to each situation. Gradually introduce law and consequences, never forgetting grace and mercy; they go together, and 3) Ask successful Christian parents, pastors, and elders their advice on child raising issues.

The following is a small sample list of child development concerns I have been able to identify; Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa does a more thorough job, their address is listed at the end of this evaluation. (Page 34)

1. Location of Concern

Page 9, GKGW

Ezzo Assertion

Teenage rebellion