Jill Duggar Dillard is pregnant.

[ktgrok]

I don't know too many who do, but the parents in my life who advocate that do so because they feel very, very strongly that they don't want hands associated with anything but hugging.

 

Of course, they're probably just abusive monsters.

 

You know many people who hit infants, under 1 year old, with rulers/sticks/etc?  If so, you need new friends. 

[gardenmom5]

I understand that. I'm not even of the camp that every person must earn a college degree, though I'm in favor of college. With the Duggars specifically, what bothers me is that pursuing any desired occupation does not appear to be an option, most especially for the girls. This was true in my family of origin, too. Like Michelle, my mom is a very kindly, sweet person. But she sweetly discouraged her dds from pursuing any career. College was never even mentioned, unless it was to point out that it was tremendously expensive and we had no money. True, yet embarrassing story - in high school, I did not even understand what SATs were for, nor did I understand why people were taking those tests and doing prep courses. I never took SATs. I had no knowledge at all about different kinds of colleges, Pell Grants, what community college was for, how people apply. Nothing.

 

I completely agree that college is not a magic ticket to worthwhile work...but it helps. It's the aimless little-bit-of-this-and-that description from their website that bothers me, because that is exactly how myself and my sisters looked after high school (except for one sister who had a baby by then).

 

this is making me wonder how much of my grandmother's manipulation was NPD/BPD and how much was her rural (tends to allow misogyny to flourish) evangelical background.  I heard lots of "take lots of typing classes so you can get a job as a secretary and support your husband in college."   :001_huh:  why not - take lots of typing classes so you can support yourself in college? (dh was completely done with college when we met)

 

unless you've been on the receiving end of that type of garbage, you have no idea just how demotivating it is.  the message is: you're NOT worth it.  (and yeah quill, I know you've btdt - so rest assured that wasn't directed at  you.  ;))

[Guest]

Edited for some clarity.

 

I love my friends and family. They just believe differently on child rearing than is common on this board. I have friends who go way too far the other direction and I love them, too. I can't say I enjoy their offspring overly much, though. Rude children drive me nuts and patient, respectful children are a pleasure to be around.

 

I just don't particular care how the parents got there. They all love their kids, and try to do right by them.

Are you for real? The end justifies the means?

[Slartibartfast]

Edited for some clarity.

 

I love my friends and family. They just believe differently on child rearing than is common on this board. I have friends who go way too far the other direction and I love them, too. I can't say I enjoy their offspring overly much, though. Rude children drive me nuts and patient, respectful children are a pleasure to be around.

 

I just don't particular care how the parents got there. They all love their kids, and try to do right by them.

 

You really don't care that they hit babies with objects if they are polite?

 

./ignore

[Rosie_0801]

The knee jerk jumps to the worst case scenario on these topics warrants a bit of snark. It isn't so black and white. Throwing around the term abuse is cases where it isn't warranted is damaging to dealing with situations of real abuse appropriately. It always seems to me like a boy-who-cried-a wolf issue.

 

 

I don't know about that, because Real Abuseâ„¢ covers wider territory than most people realise.

[Caroline]

It is never ok to hit a baby. (Unless he is choking.)

[Caroline]

You really don't care that they hit babies with objects if they are polite?

 

./ignore

I'm with Slartibartfast here. I don't get it.

[Caroline]

I don't know about that, because Real Abuseâ„¢ covers wider territory than most people realise.

And this needs repeating.

 

Now I'll stop posting for a few minutes.

[Joanne]

Oh man, I deserved every spanking I got and then some. My mom broke a spoon over my butt and I recall laughing at it.

 

I'd never categorize it as abuse, that was neither the intent nor result. I've thanked my mom numerous times for disciplining me and told her flat out I wish she'd not given up on it as I got older. The forms of discipline and teaching changed with age, but it was a good thing.

 

And the wooden spoon is still a family joke. I was a total stinker.

Wow. I am so sorry. Sometime, later down the road, please read The Drama of The Gifted Child.

 

Or, for the sale of your own young family, consider reading it now.

[ktgrok]

Edited for some clarity.

 

I love my friends and family. They just believe differently on child rearing than is common on this board. I have friends who go way too far the other direction and I love them, too. I can't say I enjoy their offspring overly much, though. Rude children drive me nuts and patient, respectful children are a pleasure to be around.

 

I just don't particular care how the parents got there. They all love their kids, and try to do right by them.

 

Not good enough. I know men that love their wives, but beat them, so it's ok? I shouldn't care how they get there? Bull poop. The ends don't justify the means. Hitting a baby you love isn't better than hitting a baby you don't love. It feels the same to the baby. 

[Mrs Mungo]

Edited for some clarity.

 

I love my friends and family. They just believe differently on child rearing than is common on this board. I have friends who go way too far the other direction and I love them, too. I can't say I enjoy their offspring overly much, though. Rude children drive me nuts and patient, respectful children are a pleasure to be around.

 

I just don't particular care how the parents got there. They all love their kids, and try to do right by them.

Wow. I have always received compliments on how polite and well behaved my kids are. I didn't need to hit them with a ruler or plumbing line as infants to make it happen.

[idnib]

We just pointed out in this thread how I was spanked and think it was absolutely fine and appreciate it, and you received the same and find it wrong. Maybe my parent was gentler and kinder and more loving, maybe not. But abuse isn't cut and dry, and even right after a solid whack I'd have thought someone was nuts for claiming my parents were abusing me. They loved me and disciplined me in love, for my good. For all the parenting screw ups that wasn't one of them.

 

I don't presume that just because something can cross into abuse means it will, or is inherently by nature. That's going too far.

 

Please don't distract people by talking about spanking kids. We were talking about people hitting babies with objects, if you recall. That's abusive automatically, by its nature. Yes, by its nature. 

 

Other areas are gray, like spanking older children with your hand. I wouldn't do that (and my children are very well-behaved and polite, thankyouverymuch) but I understand it's an ambiguous area.

 

 

How long before you go off in a huff after stirring the pot once again?

 

Whatever.

[Mrs Mungo]

Read the overview, completely uninterested. Thanks for the recommendation but I find it an insulting suggestion. I'm hoping you didn't mean it that way, but that's how it came across.

You are taking someone to task for being insulting after insinuating that anyone who doesn't beat their infants had rude children? (Even if the suggestion WAS insulting, which it wasn't.)

[Slartibartfast]

 

Please don't distract people by talking about spanking kids. We were talking about people hitting babies with objects, if you recall. That's abusive automatically, by its nature. Yes, by its nature. 

 

Other areas are gray, like spanking older children with your hand. I wouldn't do that (and my children are very well-behaved and polite, thankyouverymuch) but I understand it's an ambiguous area.

 

 

How long before you go off in a huff after stirring the pot once again?

 

Whatever.

 

 

 

Exactly! Hitting babies is *insane* and people who are ok with hitting babies are also *insane*

[ktgrok]

No quill, that isn't what I meant. What I meant was that I'm not in the place to judge the parenting of another. I think there is a spectrum of families and the way they raise their children varies right along with everything else about one family to another. I am not so quick to claim abuse, neglect, laziness, or whatever else just because I wouldn't personally do it.

 

We just pointed out in this thread how I was spanked and think it was absolutely fine and appreciate it, and you received the same and find it wrong. Maybe my parent was gentler and kinder and more loving, maybe not. But abuse isn't cut and dry, and even right after a solid whack I'd have thought someone was nuts for claiming my parents were abusing me. They loved me and disciplined me in love, for my good. For all the parenting screw ups that wasn't one of them.

 

I don't presume that just because something can cross into abuse means it will, or is inherently by nature. That's going too far.

 

And how apt that we get back to this - as I said earlier they might all be abusive monsters. But I really dont think so.

 

I should just ignore, but I have to know. If hitting a child with a wooden object so hard the object actually breaks isn't abuse, if hitting a 6 month old with a stick isn't abuse, what IS abuse?

[Soror]

Back the truck up, it doesn't matter what parenting methods we use as long as our kids are polite and well-behaved. Nevermind the fact that it is a false argument that one needs to use physical punishment to have well-behaved kids but I believe we are our brother's keepers. Jesus certainly stepped in for the women who was about to be stoned and didn't speak too kindly about those who hurt children. You can bet your a&* that if someone is abusing children then I'm saying something and hitting babies *should* qualify as abuse by any definition. What is the famous saying, evil happens when good men do nothing? How can we as conservatives care so much about babies from the moment of conception yet once they are born their parent's can do as they wish, they are entrusted to us by God, that is not to be considered lightly.

[Guest]

Back the truck up, it doesn't matter what parenting methods we use as long as our kids are polite and well-behaved. Nevermind the fact that it is a false argument that one needs to use physical punishment to have well-behaved kids but I believe we are our brother's keepers. Jesus certainly stepped in for the women who was about to be stoned and didn't speak too kindly about those who hurt children. You can bet your a&* that if someone is abusing children then I'm saying something and hitting babies *should* qualify as abuse by any definition. What is the famous saying, evil happens when good men do nothing? How can we as conservatives care so much about babies from the moment of conception yet once they are born their parent's can do as they wish, they are entrusted to us by God, that is not to be considered lightly.

Amen! You couldn't have said it any better!

[Mrs Mungo]

DP

[Mrs Mungo]

Did I advocate hitting a six month old. I don't think I did? All I said what that I know some parents who modify these forms of child training and implement them who are not abusing their child in any way. And that even when I disagree with the parenting method and the out working of it that doesn't mean they're wrong or abusing/neglecting/whatever their children. That's just going too far.

You don't really know what you are defending because you admit that you haven't read any of it.

 

I don't know anyone even who uses actual Babywise advice who would hit an infant.

Babywise is by Ferber. (Eta: Sorry, Ezzo! Corrected down thread) I don't agree with their advice, but I wouldn't necessarily call it abusive (although some of it can be risky, even dangerous). We are talking about the Pearls. Totally different groups of people.

 

From the books:

The Pearls recommend whipping infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They describe whipping their own 4 month old daughter (p.9). They recommend whipping the bare skin of “every child†(p.2) for “Christians and non-Christians†(p.5) and for “every transgression†(p.1). Parents who don’t whip their babies into complete submission are portrayed as indifferent, lazy, careless and neglectful (p.19) and are “creating a Nazi†(p.45).

On p.60 they recommend whipping babies who cannot sleep and are crying, and to never allow them “to get up.†On p.61 they recommend whipping a 12 month old girl for crying. On p.79 they recommend whipping a 7 month old for screaming.

On p.65 co-author Debi Pearl whips the bare leg of a 15 month old she is babysitting, 10 separate times, for not playing with something she tells him to play with. On p.56 Debi Pearl hits a 2 year old so hard “a karate chop like wheeze came from somewhere deep inside.â€

On p.44 they say not to let the child’s crying while being hit to “cause you to lighten up on the intensity or duration of the spanking.†On p.59 they recommend whipping a 3 year old until he is “totally broken.â€

On p.55 the Pearls say a mother should hit her child if he cries for her.

On p.46 the Pearls say that if a child does obey before being whipped, whip them anyway. And “if you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher.†“Defeat him totally.†On p.80 they recommend giving a child having a tantrum “a swift forceful spanking.†On the same page they say to whip small children on their bare skin until they stop screaming. “Don’t be bullied. Give him more of the same.†They say to continue whipping until their crying turns into a “wounded, submissive whimper.â€

On p.47 they recommend their various whips, including “a belt or larger tree branch†to hit children.

The Pearls recommend pulling a nursing infant’s hair (p.7), and describe tripping their non-swimming toddler so she falls into deep water (p.67). They recommend ignoring an infant’s bumped head when he falls to the floor, and ignoring skinned knees (p.86). They also say “if your child is roughed-up by peers, rejoice.†(p.81) And on p.103 the Pearls say if children lose their shoes, “let them go without until they (the children) can make the money to buy more.â€

- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2013/04/some-quotes-from-michael-pearl.html#sthash.lAearWzG.dpuf

[gardenmom5]

You know what else is insidiously harmful about parents following such methods? They assume too much responsibility for how their children "turn out." They think if they just train up their child in the way he should go, if they just control all the bad influences by having no TV, controlling interactions, preventing them from free association with others, if they just cover their child in prayer and do all the right things, then their child will rise up and call them Blessed, will grow up to be ideological clones who make no foolish or sinful choices (at least, none that are known). Well, let me tell you, it is a giant CROCK.

 

I see how my mom thought like this, still does think like this, though her youngest child is now thirty-one! My brother made some seriously foolish sinful and illegal choices last year. My mother cries the blues about how she "failed" and obviously "went wrong." Mom! Wake up! He is an adult, fully responsible for his own behavior! But IMO, that is one of the destructive legacies of the whole dysfunctional Gothard, et al. Child rearing concept. A seventy-year-old woman who blames herself for the screwing up of her thirty-year-old son? It is messed up.

 

this is my grandmother.

I happen to believe one of the greatest gifts of God is the gift of agency.  the ability to CHOOSE.  what quill is describing here - is someone usurping the agency (they are taking the ability to for one to choose onto themselves.) of another to feed THEIR OWN EGO.  it's not just bad, it's evil.

 

[ktgrok]

Did I advocate hitting a six month old. I don't think I did? All I said what that I know some parents who modify these forms of child training and implement them who are not abusing their child in any way. And that even when I disagree with the parenting method and the out working of it that doesn't mean they're wrong or abusing/neglecting/whatever their children. That's just going too far.

 

I don't know anyone even who uses actual Babywise advice who would hit an infant. I've just never seen it. What I have witnessed and been personally advised on (because I absolutely will ask older women with intelligent, sweet kids how they did it!) hasn't been anywhere near this, and I'm not comfortable painting broadly on the topic and think it's a mistake to do so.

 

I could be naive, or a bad parent. But I can't see where jumping to abuse as a default response on these topics is reasonable or fair. I can't go that far, even if I agree that the degree or implementation of some of this advice is completely inappropriate and needs to be stopped.

 

I live in circles where this isn't uncommon. I'm just not seeing what you all claim to see. And haven't experienced, in my own life, with corporal punishment. The only discipline on my own life I speak against is that done without fact finding, by an angry parent or guardian, and with no apology given when they realize they were wrong. That bugs me big time, but most of that was *verbal*.

 

You are changing your story. When we specifically referenced people hitting infants you said you knew people who did it. Even now, you seem to be saying if a person did it, it couldn't automatically be considered abuse. So, to avoid further miscommunication I will ask, clearly, and let you speak for yourself.

 

1. Is hitting an infant, say 7 months old, with a stick/spoon/ruler abuse? Yes or no?

 

2. What IS abuse, according to you?

[Guest]

The knee jerk jumps to the worst case scenario on these topics warrants a bit of snark. It isn't so black and white. Throwing around the term abuse is cases where it isn't warranted is damaging to dealing with situations of real abuse appropriately. It always seems to me like a boy-who-cried-a wolf issue.

 

Not every parent who uses these techniques or even is familiar with the teaching is an abuser. I firmly believe that clear thinking adults have the ability to glean what is useful, spit out the bones, and implement what works best for their family and should be allowed to do so without being judged as harming their children de facto. Jumping to abuse and name calling doesn't sit well with me, when anyone does it.

 

I feel strongly the accusation needs to be saved for cases that truly warrant it, and plenty of parents in these circles loves and care for their children whole doing what they believe is best. I don't think there is enough evidence to warrant all physical punishment or child training techniques as abuse, that's all I am saying. That doesn't mean some cannot use these techniques to cause excess physical harm to their children, but I don't think it is fair to imply that all of them do. That's going too far in my opinion.

 

I have always been a huge fan of the Duggars, but if they hit babies with spatulas or rubber tubing (or whatever it is they use)... well, I just can't be okay with that.  I do consider that abuse. If this its true, then IMO, the kids are trained to be afraid of getting hit.  I'm not a believer in corporal punishment at all.  I know some people swat babies hands (with their hand - not hard) to stop them from touching something dangerous, and I wouldn't call that abuse, but even that should be a last resort.  Baby-proofing stops them from touching most dangerous things.  As far as older children, I still don't like spanking.  It's just not for me.  I know people do it, but I would rather try other methods of discipline (loss of privileges).  Something is just very wrong about hitting a baby with an object.  I honestly wanted to say with a weapon, but I didn't want to sound dramatic.  

[Guest]

I could be naive, or a bad parent. But I can't see where jumping to abuse as a default response on these topics is reasonable or fair. I can't go that far, even if I agree that the degree or implementation of some of this advice is completely inappropriate and needs to be stopped.

Girl, you are making no sense. If it is completely inappropriate and needs to be stopped, WHY can you not "jump to abuse?" Why can't you call a spade a spade? How will an activity be stopped if people turn their heads and mutter none of my business?

 

I agree that there are many *styles* of acceptable parenting. I know good parents who are more lenient than I am and good parents who are more strict. I know good parents who never have a soda in the house and good parents who believe it is better to let the kids self-monitor junk food. I know parents who would not let the kids sleep past 7:00 in their dizziest daydream and I know parents who don't care if the kids sleep till noon. All are good parents; none are abusive. But if

I knew any who smack their babies with a ruler so they won't leave a blanket, I would say that is an abusive practice. Who cares if later they seem polite? The Japanese Americans seemed polite as they were shipped off to detainment camps. Does that mean it wasn't cruel and abusive to do so?

[Guest]

I don't know anyone even who uses actual Babywise advice who would hit an infant.

Babywise is by Ferber. I don't agree with their advice, but I wouldn't necessarily call it abusive (although some of it can be risky, even dangerous). We are talking about the Pearls. Totally different groups of people.

Babywise is by Gary Ezzo, but yeah, not the identical thing as the Pearls or Gothard.

[Mrs Mungo]

Ah, I've heard the terms used altogether and didn't realize that wasn't their materials, thanks for the clarification! I am very selective about what I read for parenting, and neither book/method ever made my list.

 

Those quotes sound pretty awful, I disagree with all that advice. I can't judge the parts I haven't read, but is can comfortably say even the strictest child training families I know haven't done anything like that, thankfully. I agree that is advocating abuse and is entirely inappropriate. In just don't think a parent who swats a diaper or spanks a defiant preschooler is inherently abusing, even if they prefer an implement.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree beyond this. I appreciate the clarification on source material though! Fortunately even most of the conservative parents I know don't ferberize, either. They try to find the best way to obey scripture and love their children, including not neglecting teaching and training them up. That looks different for each family. It's an area I just don't think is fair to judge wholesale. But a parent doing the advice given above as written? I'd definitely pull them aside and speak with them about it, as a first step. There's no love in that, just control, and that bugs.

 

I'm grateful I haven't seen that.

Your statement makes zero sense. If you NOW agree that the actions described ARE abusive, then how are we "agreeing to disagree?"

[Mrs Mungo]

Babywise is by Gary Ezzo, but yeah, not the identical thing as the Pearls or Gothard.

Ezzos, right, sorry! And I will say that their more mainstream book (Babywise) is different than some of what they advocate in their lectures to churches and such.

[Mrs Mungo]

What I meant was that whatever the advice, I am not comfortable automatically judging a family that says they have read or used it because the implementation might be vastly different.

What we are discussing in THIS thread is a specific person who specifically discussed what type of rulers work best for hitting infants during blanket training. Which, is not at all the same thing.

 

And implying that people who nurse beyond 3 are potentially abusing their children is crazy, considering that it was the norm for much of human history.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

You don't really know what you are defending because you admit that you haven't read any of it.

 

Babywise is by Ferber. I don't agree with their advice, but I wouldn't necessarily call it abusive (although some of it can be risky, even dangerous). We are talking about the Pearls. Totally different groups of people.

 

From the books:

The Pearls recommend whipping infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They describe whipping their own 4 month old daughter (p.9). They recommend whipping the bare skin of “every child†(p.2) for “Christians and non-Christians†(p.5) and for “every transgression†(p.1). Parents who don’t whip their babies into complete submission are portrayed as indifferent, lazy, careless and neglectful (p.19) and are “creating a Nazi†(p.45).

On p.60 they recommend whipping babies who cannot sleep and are crying, and to never allow them “to get up.†On p.61 they recommend whipping a 12 month old girl for crying. On p.79 they recommend whipping a 7 month old for screaming.

On p.65 co-author Debi Pearl whips the bare leg of a 15 month old she is babysitting, 10 separate times, for not playing with something she tells him to play with. On p.56 Debi Pearl hits a 2 year old so hard “a karate chop like wheeze came from somewhere deep inside.â€

On p.44 they say not to let the child’s crying while being hit to “cause you to lighten up on the intensity or duration of the spanking.†On p.59 they recommend whipping a 3 year old until he is “totally broken.â€

On p.55 the Pearls say a mother should hit her child if he cries for her.

On p.46 the Pearls say that if a child does obey before being whipped, whip them anyway. And “if you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher.†“Defeat him totally.†On p.80 they recommend giving a child having a tantrum “a swift forceful spanking.†On the same page they say to whip small children on their bare skin until they stop screaming. “Don’t be bullied. Give him more of the same.†They say to continue whipping until their crying turns into a “wounded, submissive whimper.â€

On p.47 they recommend their various whips, including “a belt or larger tree branch†to hit children.

The Pearls recommend pulling a nursing infant’s hair (p.7), and describe tripping their non-swimming toddler so she falls into deep water (p.67). They recommend ignoring an infant’s bumped head when he falls to the floor, and ignoring skinned knees (p.86). They also say “if your child is roughed-up by peers, rejoice.†(p.81) And on p.103 the Pearls say if children lose their shoes, “let them go without until they (the children) can make the money to buy more.â€

- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2013/04/some-quotes-from-michael-pearl.html#sthash.lAearWzG.dpuf

 

I can say in all sincerity that if I ever got a chance to be in a locked room with Debi Pearl. I would give that hideous bitch a lesson in obedience training she would not soon forget.  And then I would want a shot at Michael. 

 

[Mrs Mungo]

I can say in all sincerity that if I ever got a chance to be in a locked room with Debi Pearl. I would give that hideous bitch a lesson in obedience training she would soon forget. And then I would want a shot at Michael.

 

Fair enough, you are probably stronger and tougher, so it should be okay, right?

[Guest]

What I meant was that whatever the advice, I am not comfortable automatically judging a family that says they have read or used it because the implementation might be vastly different. Just like lots of families say they're classical, but the spectrum of that and the real day to day usage can look very different. Child training has many different flavors and each family is unique, too. I haven't lived with the Duggars or read any books by them, and accusing them of abuse in a dearth of physical evidence isn't something I'm okay with.

 

I am also hugely opposed to family beds with older children and extended nursing beyond about age three. It grosses me out, bothers me deeply, and I think it is an extremely harmful set of practices. But I'm not going to say that everyone claiming they do those things or variants of them is an abuser, either. That just goes too far for my comfort.

 

Is that a more cogent explanation?

Firstly, if someone I knew IRL advocated the Pearls, or Ezzo, or SM Davis, or Gothard, I would wait for, then ask for clarification, to see if they had reservations about any part of the practices people associate with those folks. The woman I mentioned up thread said she read Babywise and from it, got the idea of blanket training, but said she just altered it to not include corporal correction. This is what I would clearly expect from anybody endorsing any of these materials.

 

I don't know the Duggars personally, either, but we do have witness in this thread from two posters who say they did see Michelle recommend the ruler. That, coupled with other info, is enough for me to JUDGE - yes, Judge! - this as an abusive practice.

 

I saw Michelle speak about blanket training on the TV show. Her words were, "...you do something negative when they crawl off..." It gave me pause, no doubt like it gave many viewers...what sort of negative deterrent are we talking about?

 

I don't know, but your explanations seem all over the map.

[maize]

I'm curious whether anyone knows what has become of the Pearl children (these are mostly their own children in the examples, right?) Have they followed the same parenting style or found a different way?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Fair enough, you are probably stronger and tougher, so it should be okay, right?

 

Exactly.  The only difference is I would need for someone to hold my flip flops and earrings for me.

[Guest]

You don't really know what you are defending because you admit that you haven't read any of it.

 

Babywise is by Ferber. I don't agree with their advice, but I wouldn't necessarily call it abusive (although some of it can be risky, even dangerous). We are talking about the Pearls. Totally different groups of people.

 

From the books:

The Pearls recommend whipping infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They describe whipping their own 4 month old daughter (p.9). They recommend whipping the bare skin of “every child†(p.2) for “Christians and non-Christians†(p.5) and for “every transgression†(p.1). Parents who don’t whip their babies into complete submission are portrayed as indifferent, lazy, careless and neglectful (p.19) and are “creating a Nazi†(p.45).

On p.60 they recommend whipping babies who cannot sleep and are crying, and to never allow them “to get up.†On p.61 they recommend whipping a 12 month old girl for crying. On p.79 they recommend whipping a 7 month old for screaming.

On p.65 co-author Debi Pearl whips the bare leg of a 15 month old she is babysitting, 10 separate times, for not playing with something she tells him to play with. On p.56 Debi Pearl hits a 2 year old so hard “a karate chop like wheeze came from somewhere deep inside.â€

On p.44 they say not to let the child’s crying while being hit to “cause you to lighten up on the intensity or duration of the spanking.†On p.59 they recommend whipping a 3 year old until he is “totally broken.â€

On p.55 the Pearls say a mother should hit her child if he cries for her.

On p.46 the Pearls say that if a child does obey before being whipped, whip them anyway. And “if you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher.†“Defeat him totally.†On p.80 they recommend giving a child having a tantrum “a swift forceful spanking.†On the same page they say to whip small children on their bare skin until they stop screaming. “Don’t be bullied. Give him more of the same.†They say to continue whipping until their crying turns into a “wounded, submissive whimper.â€

On p.47 they recommend their various whips, including “a belt or larger tree branch†to hit children.

The Pearls recommend pulling a nursing infant’s hair (p.7), and describe tripping their non-swimming toddler so she falls into deep water (p.67). They recommend ignoring an infant’s bumped head when he falls to the floor, and ignoring skinned knees (p.86). They also say “if your child is roughed-up by peers, rejoice.†(p.81) And on p.103 the Pearls say if children lose their shoes, “let them go without until they (the children) can make the money to buy more.â€

- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2013/04/some-quotes-from-michael-pearl.html#sthash.lAearWzG.dpuf

 

What book is this in?!?!  I almost want to accuse you of LYING because this is so horrible I feel sick.  That seriously brought tears to my eyes.  Jesus would NEVER want anyone to do this.  How awful and disgusting.  

 

My one-year-old missed his nap today and was being a terror.  Seriously.  I knew he was tired, so I tried to rock him to sleep, but he was resisting.  He just threw the biggest tantrum I've ever seen out of him.  He was even pinching me in the face.  I would hate to hear what the lunatics above would tell me to do.  Instead, I just continued to rock him, put on a song, told him I love him (and poor baby), hugged him, patted his back, and slowly but surely he fell asleep.  All babies need is love and patience.  Period.  The methods described above are absolutely child abuse.

[zoobie]

What's wrong with SM Davis? I have heard several sermons and read articles by him and saw no red flags?

Go back to page 5 of this thread I think. Basically disown your kids if they do anything against your commands. That may or may not bother you.

[idnib]

What book is this in?!?!  I almost want to accuse you of LYING because this is so horrible I feel sick.  That seriously brought tears to my eyes.  Jesus would NEVER want anyone to do this.  How awful and disgusting.  

 

 

To Train Up a Child (archive, no traffic to the Pearls)

 

 

My nine- and eleven-year-old daughters came in from a neighbor's house complaining of a young mother's failure to train her child. A seven-month-old boy had, upon failing to get his way, stiffened, clenched his fists, bared his toothless gums and called down damnation on the whole place. At a time like that, the angry expression on a baby's face can resemble that of one instigating a riot. The young mother, wanting to do the right thing, stood there in helpless consternation, apologetically shrugged her shoulders and said, "What can I do?" My incredulous nine-year-old whipped back, "Switch him." The mother responded, "I can't, he's too little." With the wisdom of a veteran who had been on the little end of the switch, my daughter answered, "If he is old enough to pitch a fit, he is old enough to be spanked."

[albeto.]

What book is this in?!?!  I almost want to accuse you of LYING because this is so horrible I feel sick.  That seriously brought tears to my eyes.  Jesus would NEVER want anyone to do this.  How awful and disgusting.  

 

My one-year-old missed his nap today and was being a terror.  Seriously.  I knew he was tired, so I tried to rock him to sleep, but he was resisting.  He just threw the biggest tantrum I've ever seen out of him.  He was even pinching me in the face.  I would hate to hear what the lunatics above would tell me to do.  Instead, I just continued to rock him, put on a song, told him I love him (and poor baby), hugged him, patted his back, and slowly but surely he fell asleep.  All babies need is love and patience.  Period.  The methods described above are absolutely child abuse.

 

I don't mean to argue with you but to suggest an angle of which you might not be aware, but the Pearls get their arguments from their religious beliefs. It's simply a fact that not everyone reads the same scriptures figuratively. Further, if you feel that you're potentially protecting your child from an eternity of burning and experiencing nonstop torture (which they suggest, and is supported by other faith communities), a smack on the arm, hand, or leg is small potatoes in comparison. I recognize most people here likely don't agree with the Pearls or other advocates like them, but their arguments are solidly supported by them by their holy texts.

 

He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

Proverbs 13:24

 

Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.

Proverbs 19:18

 

Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him

Proverbs 22:15

 

Do not hold back discipline from the child, Although you strike him with the rod, he will not die.

Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

Proverbs 23:13-14

 

The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly.

Proverbs 20:30

 

 

[Guest]

What's wrong with SM Davis? I have heard several sermons and read articles by him and saw no red flags?

*sigh* i have to cook dinner. Look it up. He is one of the recommended resources on the Duggars site. I verified this myself earlier in the thread.

 

P.s. When I read SM Davis' website, I see my parents. I don't get all this manipulation and emotional blackmale of grown kids. I don't even do this kind of crap with my teens. If I don't think their choices are wise, I tell them so. They don't run amok. I can't be certain, but I think it is because they love me. I think it was Stephen Covey who said your kids need to know you are on their side. "It is a grievous offense to hurt your best buddy." So that is my parenting principle i strive to follow.

[Guest]

To Train Up a Child (archive, no traffic to the Pearls)

 

Quote

 

My nine- and eleven-year-old daughters came in from a neighbor's house complaining of a young mother's failure to train her child. A seven-month-old boy had, upon failing to get his way, stiffened, clenched his fists, bared his toothless gums and called down damnation on the whole place. At a time like that, the angry expression on a baby's face can resemble that of one instigating a riot. The young mother, wanting to do the right thing, stood there in helpless consternation, apologetically shrugged her shoulders and said, "What can I do?" My incredulous nine-year-old whipped back, "Switch him." The mother responded, "I can't, he's too little." With the wisdom of a veteran who had been on the little end of the switch, my daughter answered, "If he is old enough to pitch a fit, he is old enough to be spanked."

 

 

OMGosh.  I don't even know what to say.  

[Guest]

 

I don't mean to argue with you but to suggest an angle of which you might not be aware, but the Pearls get their arguments from their religious beliefs. It's simply a fact that not everyone reads the same scriptures figuratively. Further, if you feel that you're potentially protecting your child from an eternity of burning and experiencing nonstop torture (which they suggest, and is supported by other faith communities), a smack on the arm, hand, or leg is small potatoes in comparison. I recognize most people here likely don't agree with the Pearls or other advocates like them, but their arguments are solidly supported by them by their holy texts.

 

He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

Proverbs 13:24

 

Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.

Proverbs 19:18

 

Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him

Proverbs 22:15

 

Do not hold back discipline from the child, Although you strike him with the rod, he will not die.

Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

Proverbs 23:13-14

 

The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly.

Proverbs 20:30

 

I know people twist things to get what they want out of it.  I've always seen these verses as the rod of discipline (the Bible also talks about the rod of pride, which is not a literal rod).  Some people don't discipline their children at all.  I believe, if we love them, we are to discipline them and train them in the way they should go.  Jesus lovingly did this.

 

 I have extended family members that believe in spanking older children.  It's not for me, but I don't think they are being abusive.  However,  I don't know anyone who takes these verses to mean they should beat their children, or spank babies with spatulas/rulers.

[Audrey]

You don't really know what is going on in those homes. Very few people would admit to abusing their baby, would they? But, people do it every day. None of those people believe that they are *monsters*. If you have not read anything or heard lectures from the Pearls or Gothards, then you really are NOT in a position to discuss it.

 

 

The bolded -- exactly.

 

ArcticMom, you can read most of the Pearls' stuff online.  Gothard's stuff tends to only be available if you're in his group of followers.  If you ever do read any of the Pearls' stuff, I am sure you will be shocked and repulsed at what they freely and openly recommend.  It goes beyond hitting babies with implements. The sum total of it is so reprehensible it will sicken your stomach.  I can almost guarantee it.

[Mrs Mungo]

I agree with Jinnah that people twist these things however they want to suit their own tastes. Fortunately most parents using the bible as parenting source material are not physical or emotional abusers.

Most of us discussing this with you are Christians. Albeto believes that religion is universally wrong, harmful and should be eliminated. It should be obvious that the vast majority of posters here disagree with those assertions. Dr. Sears and his wife are Christians and come at this from a far different angle.

[Mrs Mungo]

What book is this in?!?! I almost want to accuse you of LYING because this is so horrible I feel sick.

Does that change your feelings regarding the Duggars actively promoting this exact book?

[albeto.]

I know people twist things to get what they want out of it.  I've always seen these verses as the rod of discipline.  Some people don't discipline their children at all.  I believe, if we love them, we are to discipline them and train them in the way they should go.  Jesus lovingly did this.

 

 I have extended family members that believe in spanking older children.  It's not for me, but I don't think they are being abusive.  However,  I don't really know anyone who takes these verses to mean they should beat their children.

 

What you don't seem to understand is that they don't believe they are twisting anything, they believe you are. By ignoring what these scriptures *really* mean, you're twisting them to make yourself feel better, rather than trusting God to mean what he says, don't you know? Whether or not you are persuaded by this line of thinking, many people are. They do absolutely believe Jesus not only condones this, but encourages and blesses it. They do absolutely believe they are doing the loving thing - protecting their child from being burned alive for all eternity. 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Exactly.  The only difference is I would need for someone to hold my flip flops and earrings for me.

I would hold your flip flops and earrings. Just call me when you're ready.

[Guest]

Does that change your feelings regarding the Duggars actively promoting this exact book?

 

If they do those methods, I am no longer a fan. They should NOT be promoting that book.

[Guest]

What you don't seem to understand is that they don't believe they are twisting anything, they believe you are. By ignoring what these scriptures *really* mean, you're twisting them to make yourself feel better, rather than trusting God to mean what he says, don't you know? Whether or not you are persuaded by this line of thinking, many people are. They do absolutely believe Jesus not only condones this, but encourages and blesses it. They do absolutely believe they are doing the loving thing - protecting their child from being burned alive for all eternity. 

 

If Jesus condoned that, he would have let the woman at the well be stoned.  People need to use some common sense.

[albeto.]

Most of us discussing this with you are Christians. Albeto believes that religion is universally wrong, harmful and should be eliminated. It should be obvious that the vast majority of posters here disagree with those assertions. Dr. Sears and his wife are Christians and come at this from a far different angle.

 

Not universally wrong, but objectively unreliable. The fact that this belief system serves as a tool that can and does justify oppression is illustrated in this thread. But no, not universally wrong simply because there is no such thing as universal right or wrong. 

 

Carry on...

 

:)

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

"There are none so blind as those who refuse to see."

 

Artic Mama, I was guessing you were a moral relativist when you didn't want to call spanking a baby with an instrument abusive. Plenty of parents who "love" their kids still abuse them. My siblings were wonderfully well behaved ; their comunity was shocked when my parents were arrested for child abuse and assult.

 

You do not seem interested in learning anything here, and seem to consider anything any other parent does none of your business. Therefore I submit that many patient ladies here are wasting their time and emotions responding to you.

[Mrs Mungo]

Not universally wrong, but objectively unreliable. The fact that this belief system serves as a tool that can and does justify oppression is illustrated in this thread. But no, not universally wrong simply because there is no such thing as universal right or wrong.

 

Carry on...

 

:)

It also can and does lead to greater freedom as illustrated by Wilberforce and others. There have been all sorts of different mechanics in the past to oppress people. Religion is far from the only one. Some people can and will use excuse to justify their actions.

 

You have said in the past that you want to see religion eliminated, correct?

[albeto.]

If Jesus condoned that, he would have let the woman at the well be stoned.

 

I understand that's your interpretation. The Pearls, et al, believe differently. Does that make sense? They don't believe they're doing anything wrong by encouraging parents to do what they believe is taking a strong, biblical approach to parenting. Ultimately, it doesn't matter to me how you read and interpret your scriptures, you don't need to try and convince me any more than they do. I'm just pointing out that the claim Jesus would never endorse that is an opinion, and a rather modern one at that. Looking back at history will give you an idea of just how differently discipline was addressed with children, perfectly justified by self-identified Christians.