Michael Pearl's Response to his critics today

[2cents]

Pearl is a whack-a-do. Reading that bizarro post of his just confirms it. :eek:

[keptwoman]

That strikes me as delusional. I'd have to say reading that that he has a mental illness of some type, that is not the words of a sane man but the ravings of a deluded and arrogant lunatic. Yes, very cult-leaderish and just plain ol scary. I'm very tempted to forward this link on to a few people.

 

I wonder what Pearl followers think of this, does it cause them to pause in their support of him?

[smilesonly]

What an inhuman, despicable, disgusting madman.

 

:iagree:

[The Governess]

I just can't imagine that any parent could read that blog post and come away thinking that he is the type of man that they would like to receive counsel from on the topic of child rearing. :001_huh:

 

Unreal. That man is demented.

[smilesonly]

 

I wonder what Pearl followers think of this, does it cause them to pause in their support of him?

 

It doesn't seem so. They "take what is useful, and leave the rest."

 

Unfortunately, buying into *anything* the pearls write and speak about just puts more money in their pockets.

 

Of course..there are other books out there that are useful and EXTREMELY CHRISTIAN, but...>insert excuses<.

 

If the pearls had ONE good thing to say that would make the wildest dc to *finally* behave, I would pass and pass and pass. Why? Ultimately my money would fill his evil pocket. A HUGE NO THANK YOU.;)

[smilesonly]

A little OT, but I would LOVE to see/hear the adult children of DR. William and Martha Sears(RN) and "the pearls" discuss "child training."

 

Actually, I would love to have the adult children of the Sears vs the pearls on all levels of intelligence-including emotional!(For those, like myself and dh, whom believe the emotional IQ is waaay more important than the standard IQ.)

 

Just a thought...

[freeindeed]

That strikes me as delusional. I'd have to say reading that that he has a mental illness of some type, that is not the words of a sane man but the ravings of a deluded and arrogant lunatic. Yes, very cult-leaderish and just plain ol scary. I'm very tempted to forward this link on to a few people.

 

I wonder what Pearl followers think of this, does it cause them to pause in their support of him?

 

:iagree:

These are my thoughts as well. Truly it sounds like the ramblings of a madman. What is the big focus on laughter all about? And why in the world does he mention cackling chickens? A child is dead, and this man shows neither pity nor remorse for his hand in it. I'm a Christian, and I don't see how Mr. Pearl can justify his methods biblically. It's sad and sickening.

[3boysmama]

That man is just horrifying. I would love to leave a comment on his blog but to do so would require becoming a member and that is something I would never do.

 

I find it very telling that Pearl claims that all good children, and all well adjusted adults are his. Pearl does not glorify God in any way nor aknowledge that all good comes from Him. To Mr. Pearl I would like to say;

 

Whenever a mother finds herself going too far in taking your parenting advice and beating her child, may she find a loving counselor to help her do better. That counselor will be one of His.

 

Whenever a parent finds himself in the unthinkable situation of being incarcerated for having murdered a child by following your advice, may they find a forgiving pastor or minister to help him. That pastor will be one of His.

 

Whenever a child grows up to be an adult with an empty hole in his heart where safety, security and love from parents should be, and instead finds only fear and pain because, not only did his parents beat him but expressed their delight in doing so on your advice; may he find a friend to lead him to the healer of all sorrows, the Savior, Jesus Christ. That friend will be one of His.

 

When a young adult finds herself terrified to hold her newborn baby because the only example she has ever seen are those who followed your advice and abused their infants, may she find someone who will show her a better way; the loving way to raise a child. That someone will be one of His.

 

When you pass from this life, Mr. Pearl, do you expect that the Savior will meet you with a whip around his neck to give you what you deserve? No he will meet you with his palms upraised to show the wounds he received in atoning for your sins so you wouldn't have to feel the whip. Then he will ask you why you caused so much pain and suffering, sorrow and heartbreak in His name. I wonder what the answer will be.

 

 

Just my 2 cents,

Amber in SJ

 

Beautifully said!!

[Erica in PA]

That man is just horrifying. I would love to leave a comment on his blog but to do so would require becoming a member and that is something I would never do.

 

I find it very telling that Pearl claims that all good children, and all well adjusted adults are his. Pearl does not glorify God in any way nor aknowledge that all good comes from Him. To Mr. Pearl I would like to say;

 

Whenever a mother finds herself going too far in taking your parenting advice and beating her child, may she find a loving counselor to help her do better. That counselor will be one of His.

 

Whenever a parent finds himself in the unthinkable situation of being incarcerated for having murdered a child by following your advice, may they find a forgiving pastor or minister to help him. That pastor will be one of His.

 

Whenever a child grows up to be an adult with an empty hole in his heart where safety, security and love from parents should be, and instead finds only fear and pain because, not only did his parents beat him but expressed their delight in doing so on your advice; may he find a friend to lead him to the healer of all sorrows, the Savior, Jesus Christ. That friend will be one of His.

 

When a young adult finds herself terrified to hold her newborn baby because the only example she has ever seen are those who followed your advice and abused their infants, may she find someone who will show her a better way; the loving way to raise a child. That someone will be one of His.

 

When you pass from this life, Mr. Pearl, do you expect that the Savior will meet you with a whip around his neck to give you what you deserve? No he will meet you with his palms upraised to show the wounds he received in atoning for your sins so you wouldn't have to feel the whip. Then he will ask you why you caused so much pain and suffering, sorrow and heartbreak in His name. I wonder what the answer will be.

 

 

Just my 2 cents,

Amber in SJ

 

Your post literally gave me chills, Amber. So very, very insightful, and gracious. I hope you will consider emailing this to Mr. Pearl. He needs to read it.

[tricia]

HMMM, very interesting. Not sure what to think of it.

[Nestof3]

Wow -- his message is so full of pride. Sure, he may have applied his methods differently to his children. I cannot know for certain what his experience was, but to not even express that the woman who killed her daughter was out of line is just beyond understanding.

[msjones]

Does he have a board of directors? A pastor? Any person to whom he is accountable?

 

Does anyone know?

[aggieamy]

Does he have a board of directors? A pastor? Any person to whom he is accountable?

 

Does anyone know?

 

Oh there is Someone who he is accountable to. That day will come. Might not be for awhile though. If I were him I'd be very concerned about it.

[msjones]

Oh there is Someone who he is accountable to. That day will come. Might not be for awhile though. If I were him I'd be very concerned about it.

 

You're right about Someone. ;)

 

But I mean a person. Is he a one-man-show?

[keptwoman]

I believe he is the leader of the pack. I wonder if he is currently shopping for land to house his cult.

[smrtmama]

I believe he is the leader of the pack. I wonder if he is currently shopping for land to house his cult.

 

No Greater Compound

[Jean in Newcastle]

I honestly don't understand what is so terrible about what he wrote. He was not writing specifically about the child abuse that happened. I do not know if he has addressed that elsewhere or not. He was writing about his belief that his teaching on consistent and immediate discipline works. He was writing about his belief that that kind of discipline leads to adults who are secure, have a good work ethic and are happy in life. He used hyperbole to get his point across. He referred to children mimicking the same kind of discipline but laughing as they play because they are secure children who do not feel abused.

 

I do not copy his method. But I do believe that consistent and immediate discipline is important. I also believe that children who know the rules and the consequences have a security that children who are left without any direction do not have. And I believe that there is a huge range in between one extreme and the other, where most of us are successful most of the time, but fail some of the time.

 

I do not believe that there is only one way to provide direction for children in general or individual children, specifically. He obviously does believe that there is one way or at least that a specific method is easier to teach than principles. I do not believe that his children or grandchildren are abused. I do think that when you teach methods rather than sound principles then it is easy for unthinking people to slip into abuse. So I will not recommend his books to anyone. But I do not understand why instead of rational discussion there has to be name-calling and a what I think is a hyperbole in interpretation of what he wrote.

[Alphabetika]

That man is just horrifying. I would love to leave a comment on his blog but to do so would require becoming a member and that is something I would never do.

 

I find it very telling that Pearl claims that all good children, and all well adjusted adults are his. Pearl does not glorify God in any way nor aknowledge that all good comes from Him. To Mr. Pearl I would like to say;

 

Whenever a mother finds herself going too far in taking your parenting advice and beating her child, may she find a loving counselor to help her do better. That counselor will be one of His.

 

Whenever a parent finds himself in the unthinkable situation of being incarcerated for having murdered a child by following your advice, may they find a forgiving pastor or minister to help him. That pastor will be one of His.

 

Whenever a child grows up to be an adult with an empty hole in his heart where safety, security and love from parents should be, and instead finds only fear and pain because, not only did his parents beat him but expressed their delight in doing so on your advice; may he find a friend to lead him to the healer of all sorrows, the Savior, Jesus Christ. That friend will be one of His.

 

When a young adult finds herself terrified to hold her newborn baby because the only example she has ever seen are those who followed your advice and abused their infants, may she find someone who will show her a better way; the loving way to raise a child. That someone will be one of His.

 

When you pass from this life, Mr. Pearl, do you expect that the Savior will meet you with a whip around his neck to give you what you deserve? No he will meet you with his palms upraised to show the wounds he received in atoning for your sins so you wouldn't have to feel the whip. Then he will ask you why you caused so much pain and suffering, sorrow and heartbreak in His name. I wonder what the answer will be.

 

 

Just my 2 cents,

Amber in SJ

 

Eloquent, gracious, poignant words, Amber. Thank you. :grouphug:

Edited March 4, 2010 by Alphabetika

[dtb1999]

I honestly don't understand what is so terrible about what he wrote.

 

Huh. :001_huh:

 

 

He used hyperbole to get his point across. He referred to children mimicking the same kind of discipline but laughing as they play because they are secure children who do not feel abused.

 

They are very likely laughing after "spanking" their dolls because *they* are probably used to hearing laughter after a spanking. Who are we to say how a small child or infant feels after being hit? I would venture to guess they don't like it, at the very least. :glare:

 

 

 

I do not believe that his children or grandchildren are abused.

 

Have you read any of their material? You do not think that hitting babies with plumbing line is abuse? How about waving their favorite food or toy in front of them and hitting them repeatedly when they try to reach for it? I could go on, but I'd really rather not think about the atrocities they subject their children and grandchildren to. :banghead:

[ThatCyndiGirl]

Not to mention "not hitting your children in anger, but with joyfullness".

 

I cannot imagine hitting my child while smiling/laughing/or otherwise being joyful. :confused:

 

:crying::mad:

[Joanne]

I honestly don't understand what is so terrible about what he wrote.

 

I do not copy his method. But I do believe that consistent and immediate discipline is important. I also believe that children who know the rules and the consequences have a security that children who are left without any direction do not have. And I believe that there is a huge range in between one extreme and the other, where most of us are successful most of the time, but fail some of the time.

 

I do not believe that there is only one way to provide direction for children in general or individual children, specifically. He obviously does believe that there is one way or at least that a specific method is easier to teach than principles. I do not believe that his children or grandchildren are abused. I do think that when you teach methods rather than sound principles then it is easy for unthinking people to slip into abuse. So I will not recommend his books to anyone. But I do not understand why instead of rational discussion there has to be name-calling and a what I think is a hyperbole in interpretation of what he wrote.

 

 

:confused: Do you not see the inappropriateness and arrogance and irreverency of his blog post?

 

I do not believe hyperbole as a literary tactic in this case is appropriate.

 

My criticism of his parenting advice is not because he spanks or believes in firm, consistent "discipline".

[justamouse]

No Greater Compound

 

*snort*

[HRAAB]

I wasn't going to read it, but I did. That man is not mentally okay. What does he have - delusions of godhood?

[HappyGrace]

You know, I was trying very hard to give them the benefit of the doubt til reading that. :glare:

[Jean in Newcastle]

Huh. :001_huh:

 

 

 

They are very likely laughing after "spanking" their dolls because *they* are probably used to hearing laughter after a spanking. Who are we to say how a small child or infant feels after being hit? I would venture to guess they don't like it, at the very least. :glare:

 

 

 

 

Have you read any of their material? You do not think that hitting babies with plumbing line is abuse? How about waving their favorite food or toy in front of them and hitting them repeatedly when they try to reach for it? I could go on, but I'd really rather not think about the atrocities they subject their children and grandchildren to. :banghead:

 

I've read quite a bit of what he's written, including this small article.

In this article he says, (I've copied and pasted here so that I don't accidentally change anything). "My granddaughters laugh with joy after giving their baby dolls a spanking for “being naughty†because they know their dolls will grow up to be the best mamas and daddies in the world—just like them." That does not say that people laugh at them after spanking. They may or may not. Other material may say that (I don't recall that it does, but I may very well be wrong). This says that they've learned a model of parenting that includes spanking. And they see that as a mark of being a good mommy and daddy. You may or may not see spanking in any form as being a legitimate form of discipline. But many people other than the Pearl's do, and many of them would teach their children that that is part of being a good mommy and daddy.

 

I do not agree with using plumbing line. But I do not think that a light swat with plumbing line is automatic abuse. I think that there is a legitimate need to train young children that "no means no". I think that keeps them safe from electrical outlets (although I would also use safety plugs) and knick-knacks about the house (again I do some baby-proofing although I could leave some stuff out because I supervised my children closely). I personally think that can be taught without waving food in front of the child. But while I don't think it is advisable, I don't think that having a short training session of "no means no" is automatic abuse. From what I've seen of their materials, they assume that these training sessions will be very short lived. The problem of course is that all children may not respond to one session.

 

So - again. I think that teaching a one size fits all method is risky and inadvisable. So I will say so. But I think that using vitriolic language to do so dilutes my message.

[Jean in Newcastle]

:confused: Do you not see the inappropriateness and arrogance and irreverency of his blog post?

 

I do not believe hyperbole as a literary tactic in this case is appropriate.

 

My criticism of his parenting advice is not because he spanks or believes in firm, consistent "discipline".

 

Joanne - I do not agree with his message. I actually have great respect for the objectivity with which you have expressed yourself in all the Pearl posts. I find it disturbing to read post after post that is not written with the kind of objectivity which you have shown. I believe that his message is simplistic and focuses on specific application in a one-size-fits-all formula. Many other people have been guilty of the same. (Bill Gothard is one that comes to mind right away.) I disagree with Bill Gothard, too. But I wouldn't say that he is the devil incarnate or that he is the leader of a cult. That is what I am trying to communicate.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Jean in Newcastle

[MelanieM]

I do not believe that his children or grandchildren are abused.

 

Where I live it is most certainly considered abuse. In Canada, it is illegal to use corporal punishment on a child under the age of two or over the age of 12, and using any type of implement is strictly prohibited at any age. Not that I'd need a law to tell me that hitting an infant with plumbing line is abusive.

 

In what whacked out world is what this man preaches not considered crossing a line? I really don't understand how people can defend this type of behaviour. This is so very far from Christ-like the whole thing would be funny if it weren't so disturbing.

Edited March 4, 2010 by MelanieM

[mammaruss]

Ughhh!! I can feel my blood pressure going up just reading that! I also checked them out on Facebook and they have soooooooo many people that fully support them!! That is very disturbing on so many levels!!!

[kalanamak]

This seems frankly infra dig, without any nobleness of spirit. I wouldn't bother him with how incorrect he is, in that I know many happy, productive, polite members of society who were raised without tubing, and some of us without even the benefit of believing in a deity.

 

He seems to hint that his method will "take over the world".

 

But, it is run of the mill grandiosity. He reminds me of a more successful Fred Phelps....and indeed, I bet he is laughing all the way to the bank.

Edited March 4, 2010 by kalanamak
gram-mah

[nmoira]

Oh, I wish I hadn't read that. :banghead:

[smilesonly]

Where I live it is most certainly considered abuse. In Canada, it is illegal to use corporal punishment on a child under the age of two or over the age of 12, and it using any type of implement is strictly prohibited at any age. Not that I'd need a law to tell me that hitting an infant with plumbing line is abusive.

 

In what whacked out world is what this man preaches not considered crossing a line? I really don't understand how people can defend this type of behaviour. This is so very far from Christ-like the whole thing would be funny if it weren't so disturbing.

 

Oh, my gosh, I so agree. Amen.

[hsmom3tn]

I honestly don't understand what is so terrible about what he wrote.

 

It sounded to me like he was saying that children who are not brought up using his methods of training will somehow be lesser adults than those who have been "trained". That is what bothered me about what he wrote.

[swimmermom3]

I've read quite a bit of what he's written, including this small article.

In this article he says, (I've copied and pasted here so that I don't accidentally change anything). "My granddaughters laugh with joy after giving their baby dolls a spanking for “being naughty†because they know their dolls will grow up to be the best mamas and daddies in the world—just like them." That does not say that people laugh at them after spanking. They may or may not. Other material may say that (I don't recall that it does, but I may very well be wrong). This says that they've learned a model of parenting that includes spanking. And they see that as a mark of being a good mommy and daddy. You may or may not see spanking in any form as being a legitimate form of discipline. But many people other than the Pearl's do, and many of them would teach their children that that is part of being a good mommy and daddy.

 

I do not agree with using plumbing line. But I do not think that a light swat with plumbing line is automatic abuse. I think that there is a legitimate need to train young children that "no means no". I think that keeps them safe from electrical outlets (although I would also use safety plugs) and knick-knacks about the house (again I do some baby-proofing although I could leave some stuff out because I supervised my children closely). I personally think that can be taught without waving food in front of the child. But while I don't think it is advisable, I don't think that having a short training session of "no means no" is automatic abuse. From what I've seen of their materials, they assume that these training sessions will be very short lived. The problem of course is that all children may not respond to one session.

 

So - again. I think that teaching a one size fits all method is risky and inadvisable. So I will say so. But I think that using vitriolic language to do so dilutes my message.

 

Jean, I had never heard of the Pearls until I read about them here. I went to their website and read an article about training with the rod. In the article, Pearl wrote about a time early in their ministry where they stayed with a family that was having trouble with their 2-3 yo. Pearl described a late night drive where he, Debbie, and the family were returning back to this family's home. The child (who apparently was a bit spoiled) was whining to sit by his mother. Pearl advised the father to pull over and spank the child for whining. The child then cried after the spanking. On Pearl's advice, the father pulled over and spanked the child again. The goal was for the child to quiet down in 5 minutes or he would get spanked again. It was 11pm on a lonely 20-mile long road. That was not a short-lived training session. Pearl would have to be a sadistic imbecile not to see what was happening with a tired toddler. I wish I hadn't read that article. The whole thing feels dirty, tainted, and sick.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I honestly don't understand what is so terrible about what he wrote.

 

It sounded to me like he was saying that children who are not brought up using his methods of training will somehow be lesser adults than those who have been "trained". That is what bothered me about what he wrote.

 

Yes, that bothered me too. But I've heard and read many speakers/authors who have been that dogmatic and that black and white. When I said "so terrible" I did not mean that I agreed with it. I meant that I did not see it as so unusual and evil as to generate some of the language used to describe him.

[MelanieM]

I really, really, really strive for tolerance and basically believe that people have a right to make their own choices in life. But man, this Pearl stuff is just breaking my heart. I want to go scoop all my littles up and hug and kiss them a million times over.

 

I think I need to go do some Ho'oponopono on this. Maybe I can find a place of love in my heart for this horribly misguided man and his followers.

[myfatherslily]

I have commented a few times that I am one who has read and gleaned/used some things from TTUAC and the Help Meet book. I've never been a fervent follower of TTUAC, but I have read several of the free newsletters, and I never thought of their materials as totally objectionable. I found a few things harsh, but I dismissed them, and didn't think much more of it.

 

Since all this has happened, and since I've read many of the links posted here and on other blogs/forums, I will no longer read their materials in a state of an open mind. If I do read their materials now, it will be to keep myself aware of what they are writing, because some in my church have followed their methods. But, I will no longer take their parenting advice as a valid option for healthy parenting. I'm not to a point of totally rejecting spanking, but I do reject the attitude and spirit that comes from the Pearls.

 

This statement from Michael Pearl was very weird to me. I've never noticed such a weirdness in his tone. He often writes in a tone of sarcasm, but this was beyond sarcasm. :001_huh:

 

Yes, this :iagree: I have read TTUAC, all three No Greater Joy books, Created to Be His Helpmeet, and have received their newsletter for some time now. I've never been one to follow any idea of method to the letter and found it easy to skim over the more harsh portions. Over the past months, since summer I guess, I've been changing my own approach to discipline. I'm not as quick to discipline and I don't feel guilty about it. And you know what? I feel more relaxed. Honestly, my kids throw fits just as much as before. I have cranky days just as much as before. But there's something there that just feels different to me, since I've started shifting away from the Pearl's... I guess it's that I do laugh:) When my 2 year old throws himself dramatically on the floor cause he didn't get a second cookie, I smile and laugh at him a little. I don't feel like I have to fix him. He'll get over it.

 

I agree also that the tone in this blog post is far more proud than I've ever seen. Fingers are pointing at Michael Pearl. He'll never admit to being an ounce of wrong, ever.

 

I wonder what Pearl followers think of this, does it cause them to pause in their support of him?

 

Yes, absolutely. I was already shifting away, and have been following the threads here with great interest. This response is pretty much the last straw. Utterly ridiculous, arrogant, and thoroughly lacking in compassion.

[keptwoman]

I honestly don't understand what is so terrible about what he wrote.

What I found disturbing about it was it's lunacy, all that mention of laughing, it was just odd. It didn't sound like the defense of a sane man, but the ravings of a lunatic. That post was just plain weird. And the fact that those ravings felt to him like they made some sense, well IMHO, he can't be well.

 

And many cults have been started by similar not-quite-well and rather deluded people.

 

eta: also, one assumes that that was his defence for the accusations regarding his involvement via his books in the deaths of the children. Well it's just an odd defence, there was pride and arrogance, not a mention of the kids who died, well nothing at all to do with the accusations at all really. The words that spring to my mind when I read it (and I have no particular bias as I've known little of this man before the last month) is arrogant, nonsense (in the lack of sense way), deluded.

Edited March 4, 2010 by keptwoman

[mammaruss]

So why does he feel that his way of child rearing is so superior and the only correct way to raise a child???

Where is his respect for parents with child rearing ideas that are different than his?? Does he know that not everyone chooses to follow his method?? His opinon on raising children does NOT make him or his family any better than anyone!! We are all equal----we are all born naked, we all die---and we all wipe our butts!!

[LauraGB]

I honestly don't understand what is so terrible about what he wrote. He was not

writing specifically about the child abuse that happened.

 

Oh, Jean. The man is responding to the criticism he has received because of the death of a child(ren). The man is saying even the chickens are laughing at this [criticism] and his laughing grandchildren who giggle while beating their dolls...not the ravings of a sane individual no matter how you shake the dice.

[Jean in Newcastle]

So why does he feel that his way of child rearing is so superior and the only correct way to raise a child???

Where is his respect for parents with child rearing ideas that are different than his?? Does he know that not everyone chooses to follow his method?? His opinon on raising children does NOT make him or his family any better than anyone!! We are all equal----we are all born naked, we all die---and we all wipe our butts!!

 

I totally agree with you. And here is his great weakness and arrogance.

 

Oh, Jean. The man is responding to the criticism he has received because of the death of a child(ren). The man is saying even the chickens are laughing at this [criticism] and his laughing grandchildren who giggle while beating their dolls...not the ravings of a sane individual no matter how you shake the dice.

 

Well, I'm obviously in a huge minority for not having read this particular link that way. I read it as a stylistic device. But I'm going to stop posting about it because it ends up sounding like I'm arguing for his argument instead, which I'm not.

[Laurie]

Oh, Jean. The man is responding to the criticism he has received because of the death of a child(ren). The man is saying even the chickens are laughing at this [criticism] and his laughing grandchildren who giggle while beating their dolls...not the ravings of a sane individual no matter how you shake the dice.

 

Or how you throw the tomahawk.

 

(When I went to the link provided here I noticed that he's also selling an instructional dvd called Knife and Tomahawk Throwing for Fun.)

[LittleIzumi]

I totally agree with you. And here is his great weakness and arrogance.

 

 

 

Well, I'm obviously in a huge minority for not having read this particular link that way. I read it as a stylistic device. But I'm going to stop posting about it because it ends up sounding like I'm arguing for his argument instead, which I'm not.

:grouphug: It's hard to not quite mesh with the other voices in our giant mob, lol.

 

I am not even going to dignify his post with a response. Well, perhaps :ack2:. I cannot imagine his surprise when he finds out just what his Father in heaven thinks about his techniques and tying them to holy scripture :(

[cathmom]

I'm not as quick to discipline and I don't feel guilty about it. And you know what? I feel more relaxed. Honestly, my kids throw fits just as much as before. I have cranky days just as much as before. But there's something there that just feels different to me, since I've started shifting away from the Pearl's... I guess it's that I do laugh:) When my 2 year old throws himself dramatically on the floor cause he didn't get a second cookie, I smile and laugh at him a little. I don't feel like I have to fix him. He'll get over it.

 

 

 

Once a few friends and I were getting together. I didn't make it because my car broke down. Later, one of my friends was telling me something that she observed. They all had 2 year olds, and our other friends were very much into training them, while this friend was much more relaxed. My friend noticed that all of the two year olds acted pretty much the same, despite all the training and swatting! They all acted 2 because, well, they were 2!! So why do all that work and make the relationship that adversarial, when really, they will just grow out of it?

[Myrrh]

Wow -- his message is so full of pride. Sure, he may have applied his methods differently to his children. I cannot know for certain what his experience was, but to not even express that the woman who killed her daughter was out of line is just beyond understanding.

 

My thoughts exactly. I also hope Amber posts her eloquent and powerful response on a blog or somewhere that more people can read it.

[Jean in Newcastle]

One last note on why I even bother to try and moderate responses when I don't agree with Michael Pearl's content.

 

I tend to be around a pretty dogmatic crowd irl because we believe in Truth with a capital T. I've found that many men of a certain generation (older) were taught to be very black and white and even extreme in their rhetoric. Now - I don't agree with that way of speaking or writing - I think it has caused a lot of grief, but I do understand it to a certain degree because I've seen it in so many men of that generation of a variety of backgrounds and perspectives.

 

Personally, truth is important to me. It is important to look to the Bible for that truth. And it is important to me to use a way of interpreting the Bible that uses certain rules of seeing what the author intended (the human author as well as the Divine author). I do not agree with the method that Michael Pearl uses to interpret the Bible.

 

Also - it is important to me to really listen to people. It is also important to me to be objective. If I disagree with someone I want it to be fair because I don't want to fall into the same rhetorical excesses that they have fallen into. Thus my posts on this thread.

[at the beach]

In response to his response:

 

Why does he feel he has the right to judge others?

 

Doesn't the Bible specifically say, judge not lest ye be judged?

 

He is not serving the Lord but he is a servant of Evil itself. Where is his humility? His humanity? His post is pure arrogance.

 

And where in the Bible does it say to treat your children in the same way you treat animals? ETA: I would never lay a hand on an animal. But he compares children to animals. They are not the same.

 

I cannot imagine taking the good from the bad with someone who appears to be on a path straight to Hell. I certainly hope the poor sheep following him wise up. All they have to do is read the Bible to see he is in no way a follower of Christ.

 

Also, the following verse has always been close in my heart when dealing with my own children:

 

Father's do not provoke your children to anger, lest they be discouraged. Colossians 3:21 KJV

 

Or the same verse, from the Bible in Basic English, "Fathers do not be hard on your children, so that their spirit may not be broken."

Edited March 5, 2010 by Violet

[meet me in paris]

Pearl is a whack-a-do. Reading that bizarro post of his just confirms it. :eek:

:iagree: seriously, seriously sicko.

[Pamela H in Texas]

Jean,

 

I just wanted to let you know that when *I* read it, before there were ANY other posts in this thread, I read it like you did. In fact, I've read similar from homeschoolers on MANY comments sections of articles/blogs. So I did think, "waste of a post. We get it; he and his followers agree with his methods."

 

I do agree with the posts here though. His response should have been reverent, serious, concerned, and not nearly so pompous. It is fine to feel his methods are best (don't we all sometimes?), but it's another thing to miss that this is about a child's DEATH.

 

BTW, I got to your next post. I totally agree with: If I disagree with someone I want it to be fair because I don't want to fall into the same rhetorical excesses that they have fallen into.

 

When I read TTUAC (twice, once fairly recently), I agreed with A LOT of what they said. Because I went into it without simply looking at the abuse (and there most certainly is abuse involved), I found plenty to agree with. I believe in strict discipline. I believe in consistency. I believe in immediately handling things. I believe in clear expectations. I believe in high standards. I believe children are much more capable than most people expect of them. I believe in family worship (not shipping kids off to the nursery). I personally used blanket training. And a number of other things. I don't agree with their METHODS. And I WAY don't agree with the one size fits all thing as I have what is probably THE easiest kid in the world who most certainly would have been hurt by such harsh methods. And I have a kiddo who gave new definition to the word challenging who would have been found dead using such methods (esp if I fell for the "possessed damsel" and "wimpy" comments!).

 

And really, there ARE better methods. For example, on a link posted earlier in this thread, the example is given of a woman who switched her 3yo daughter every night for 23 nights to get her to stay in bed. SN has shown that within a couple days of consistent discipline (that I still don't agree with but that is another thread), a family can turn nightmare situation into half decent, including kids going to bed at a decent time and without carrying on. Most people haven't allowed their 3yos to get nearly as out of control as SN's families. Most people could get these results in WAY under 3 weeks. Key is not the switch, but the consistency.

 

Anyway, so like you, I am willing to say there may be a redeeming bit here and there. However, I do agree with others, in other threads, who have pointed out that sometimes we need to get rid of even the good of something because the bad is so bad. I think that probably is the case with MP.

Edited March 4, 2010 by 2J5M9K

[TravelingChris]

Actually I do believe that his ministry is a cult. I was given one of his books many years ago and quickly decided that it wasn't any thing I wanted to do so I never read anything by them again. Then there was the thread about the HelpMeet book. Somewhere in that long thread was a link to someone who had taken long quotes from that book and challenged it with Biblical references. I read that and came to the conclusion that this is a cultic movement. Those that mean that everyone who is associated with it or reads the book is in this cult? Absolutely not. But I strongly believe that his misinterpretation of God's word is cultic.

 

I thought his recent post was weird and disturbing but I didn't know about any death associated with his book. Once I realized that this was in response to critics because of the death of a child, it makes it particularly horrific. I would not want to be meeting God and explaining how my method lead to a child's death.

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

Do you what I found significant? There were 0 comments posted on this article which surely must have been read by many proponents as well as opponents.

 

It's all about him. His children, his grandchildren, his dogs, his chickens, his eggs, his breakfast.