s/o: Heather's "Pearl" post

[linders]

After I responded with applause for Heather (still applauding), I have become curious about something. Other posters have disagreed with her, using a "to each his own" argument and citing other ways in which we all differ in our parenting. However, I pose this question - where would you draw the line?

 

IMHO, the Pearl's goal - obedient, well-mannered children - isn't necessarily bad. There is a wide range of what "obedient" looks like to people and many methods used to achieve that, and I can usually live with that. However, the actual implementation of substantial physical discipline promoted by the Pearls borders on child abuse to me. Someone who has their book on a top three list without qualification (reading into Heather's post, the "friends" admiration for the Pearls wasn't qualified), and I really wouldn't want to be friends with them nor have our kids bond.

 

There are other ethical issues where I draw the line - overt racism, drug use, spousal abuse, etc. People who indulge in such and do not see a problem with it? I really can't build a friendship with them.

 

So again, where would you draw the line on ethical issues and friendship?

 

ETA: How did this morph into a potty-training thread?? I truly am interested in the lines people draw. I think we are seeing it quite a bit in politics right now, e.g., "I could never vote for anyone who (fill in the blank).

Edited March 3, 2012 by linders

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Concerning Pearl philosophy specifically, I won't spend much time with Pearl followers while my own children are small because their attitude of superiority and judgment is so toxic. My kids have been judged by Pearlites and I won't allow that again. I don't want my children exposed to the 'training methods' at all, either, since I believe those methods are abusive.

 

I can't raise my children the way I see fit by modeling passivity when children are abused. What does it teach my children when we all see a parent whip a toddler with a spoon or plumbing supply line and happily go on with the visit as if something horrible didn't just happen?

 

It's easier when the children are older. We are reconnecting with some relatives who are Pearl and Ezzo followers now that our older children are teens. The problem has pretty much gone away for two reasons: All of the children are too old for corporal punishment by any standard, and our attachment-parented kids didn't turn out to be worldly or people who push other kids off swings.

 

In the teen years we get to reconnect with those who went the path of Pearl and Ezzo, but we have to part ways with those who follow Vision Forum and Gothard. Those philosophies affect teens greatly, and again, we don't want our children exposed.

 

(Disclaimer: This post was not created to cause offense. I am just trying to explain why we distance ourselves sometimes...it's not simply because we disagree. We have plenty of friends with whom we disagree, and many friends of different religions or belief systems. That's not a problem. It's when an attitude toward women or children goes against our grain so severely that we're offended by it that we feel no choice but to limit exposure.)

[SKL]

I could never personally accept the idea that it's good for a 3yo+ to poop in a diaper because he hasn't yet decided that he wants to poop on the toilet. It's something I really could never even consider as a parenting choice. I can't imagine how anyone in this world considers a child sitting in poop to be acceptable. Honestly, I think it is worse than an occasional spanking with an "implement" (depending on the implement).

 

However, I have never ended a relationship over a parent choosing not to potty-train. And certainly not over their liking a book that adocates child-led training (or whatever).

 

Yes, I can imagine scenarios where a parent could take corporal punishment so far that I could not have a civil conversation with them. However, just knowing that a parent likes a book - whatever it says - does not prove to me that the person abuses his/her children. I would have to know a lot more than that. I'd probably ask what in particular they like about that book and what they have successfully implemented, if I wanted to get a quick understanding of how "evil" their actual parenting practices are.

[susankenny]

In all honesty, if someone was very physical with their children as a punishment it would be very difficult to maintain a close friendship. I also could not stand to be good friends with a punitive parent. I disagree with that style of parenting and it would make me feel too sad to be around frequently.

 

 

Susan

[Pretty in Pink]

I don't care to be friends with people who parent the Pearl way or anyone who is heavy-handed with corporal punishment. I tend to stay far away from those individuals.

[forty-two]

On one hand, I could probably be friends with just about anyone if they could agree to disagree - I.e. I'm not going to pretend I think something is a valid approach if I think it is flat out morally wrong. And I don't expect them to do the same. But if they are still willing to be friends, so am I. Although I might keep dc out of it.

 

Things that I would feel compelled to state disagreement:

*Anything to do with God mandating spanking

*racist, sexist, etc language

*lawbreaking

*abuse, be it physical, mental, emotional, spiritual

 

And if they never changed or got worse, I might not be able to take it long term - idk, never been an issue yet - and would step back.

[kathymuggle]

I could never personally accept the idea that it's good for a 3yo+ to poop in a diaper because he hasn't yet decided that he wants to poop on the toilet. It's something I really could never even consider as a parenting choice. I can't imagine how anyone in this world considers a child sitting in poop to be acceptable. Honestly, I think it is worse than an occasional spanking with an "implement" (depending on the implement).

.

 

Huh. Is a three year old in a diaper worse than a 2 yr old? How is their sitting in poop until a parent changes them worse at 3 than at 2 or one? Is it the perceived laziness of the parent that bugs you? Curious - and yes totally OT.

 

On topic - yes there are deal breakers in relationships. A deal breaker for me is treating my kids badly. I actually tend to stay in contact with those who treat their own kids badly or have other issues going on (although I do not expose my kids to it). I do this so I can make sure their kids are Ok and because I hope against hope I will serve as a positive role model/support for the mother should she ever try to change. It doesn't usually work (shocker: I can't change the world!) but I know being a rationale adult in a childs life is still a good thing.

[Mommyfaithe]

On topic - yes there are deal breakers in relationships. A deal breaker for me is treating my kids badly. /QUOTE]

 

This is my deal breaker. Don't mess with my kids.....

 

I am not really great when people treat their own kids poorly, and I am not great at passing the bean dip.....

 

Faithe

[SKL]

Huh. Is a three year old in a diaper worse than a 2 yr old? How is their sitting in poop until a parent changes them worse at 3 than at 2 or one? Is it the perceived laziness of the parent that bugs you? Curious - and yes totally OT.

 

 

I used 3 because had I used 2, people would have been unable to relate. Personally I don't think a child gets to choose to poop or pee on himself once he is capable of doing otherwise. For my kids it was well before age 2; in fact, closer to age 1. Point being, I can totally disagree with other parents and still be civil toward them. But honestly, it grosses me out to have a preschooler happily sitting in poop while his mom acts like nothing is amiss. In some cases I could view it as neglect if not abuse - if the parent did not give the child an opportunity to avoid the situation.

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

I used 3 because had I used 2, people would have been unable to relate. Personally I don't think a child gets to choose to poop or pee on himself once he is capable of doing otherwise. For my kids it was well before age 2; in fact, closer to age 1. Point being, I can totally disagree with other parents and still be civil toward them. But honestly, it grosses me out to have a preschooler happily sitting in poop while his mom acts like nothing is amiss. In some cases I could view it as neglect if not abuse - if the parent did not give the child an opportunity to avoid the situation.

 

You were extremely fortunate to have children that were ready to potty train at a young age. I tried and tried and tried (consistently, not half-heartedly) from about 18 months on, and ds1 was over 4 when he stopped pooping in his pants. Ds2 was just over 3 when I could consistently leave him without a diaper. I understand that this is not the point of this thread, and that you can choose to disagree with someone over potty training, but I don't think your example is a fair comparison.

 

I would not want to have any relationship with someone who I thought either physically or emotionally abused their child, spouse, etc. Especially when they claim God wants them to do such and such.

[kathymuggle]

I used 3 because had I used 2, people would have been unable to relate. Personally I don't think a child gets to choose to poop or pee on himself once he is capable of doing otherwise. For my kids it was well before age 2; in fact, closer to age 1. Point being, I can totally disagree with other parents and still be civil toward them. But honestly, it grosses me out to have a preschooler happily sitting in poop while his mom acts like nothing is amiss. In some cases I could view it as neglect if not abuse - if the parent did not give the child an opportunity to avoid the situation.

 

Thanks for clarifying :)

 

My number isn't three - and I try not to make assumptions because so many people have children with invisible special needs ( or are simply late bloomers)- but I do hear you.

 

I have known children who were not encouraged to take normal growing up steps because the parents were too lazy to deal with it. In my case it was a neighbour who kept putting her perfectly healthy and neurotypical 5 year old in a stroller because she walked too slow. She wheeled her to kindergarten in the stroller. :001_huh: I don't consider it abusive - but it was far from good parenting.

[NotAVampireLvr]

I used 3 because had I used 2, people would have been unable to relate. Personally I don't think a child gets to choose to poop or pee on himself once he is capable of doing otherwise. For my kids it was well before age 2; in fact, closer to age 1. Point being, I can totally disagree with other parents and still be civil toward them. But honestly, it grosses me out to have a preschooler happily sitting in poop while his mom acts like nothing is amiss. In some cases I could view it as neglect if not abuse - if the parent did not give the child an opportunity to avoid the situation.

 

 

Just because a 3 y.o. isn't potty trained doesn't mean their parents are letting them sit in poop. That's an unfair blanket statement there.

 

I had one who trained at age 3, another at 18 months. Now I have another we are training right now at 2.5. With my first two I waited until they were ready and the transition from diapers to toilet was been smooth and effortless. The one I am forcing to train at 2.5 out of necessity has been a nightmare.

[LizzyBee]

Everything I've read by the Pearls makes me shudder. Even the stuff outside of physical discipline is weird and odd. Yet, I have many friends who love the Pearl books. They are happy, cheerful parents with happy, cheerful kids. I'm certain they're not implementing the Pearl techniques as harshly as outlined in the books, magazines, and website. So I am still friends with them. If they were abusive parents, I couldn't be friends with them regardless of whether they were reading Pearl books, Love and Logic, or no parenting books.

[NotAVampireLvr]

Everything I've read by the Pearls makes me shudder. Even the stuff outside of physical discipline is weird and odd. Yet, I have many friends who love the Pearl books. They are happy, cheerful parents with happy, cheerful kids. I'm certain they're not implementing the Pearl techniques as harshly as outlined in the books, magazines, and website. So I am still friends with them. If they were abusive parents, I couldn't be friends with them regardless of whether they were reading Pearl books, Love and Logic, or no parenting books.

 

I agree with this too. I have many friends that swear up and down by To Train Up A Child. Their kids are some of the happipest I know. But again, I'm pretty sure they didn't follow it to a T. Wasn't my cuppa, but their kids are very well adjusted.

[Catwoman]

Nooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!

 

Not another thread about the Pearls!!!!!!!!!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

 

These things rarely end well...

[jennynd]

I used 3 because had I used 2, people would have been unable to relate. Personally I don't think a child gets to choose to poop or pee on himself once he is capable of doing otherwise. For my kids it was well before age 2; in fact, closer to age 1. Point being, I can totally disagree with other parents and still be civil toward them. But honestly, it grosses me out to have a preschooler happily sitting in poop while his mom acts like nothing is amiss. In some cases I could view it as neglect if not abuse - if the parent did not give the child an opportunity to avoid the situation.

 

DD still not fully trained. she is 4. Am I a bit irritated? absolutely, am I gonna force her, absolutely no. She is changed as soon as she pooped. (She will announce it when she pooped. ) and I can assure she is not sitting in her poop.

 

I found there is no point to force a kid to potty trained if she doesn't feel like to. My pedi agreed that you never see a grown up still poop in their pants and forcing her will only cause her constipation. I rather spend the time and energy to teach my dd to read (who reads 2nd grade level) and do math (who does multiplication)

 

yes , she is 4 and she is not potty trained. I found your accusation of me neglecting of my child is neglecting of individual children personality

[mytwomonkeys]

i think i can be friends with just about anyone. i'm really open to how others parent and i stopped judging about 7 years ago when my son was born, lol ...heck, i'm usually too caught up in his sagas to notice what's going on around me.

 

IRL though i've never seen someone strongly discipline their child/ren publicly, it's always done privately (normally it's just verbal warning...maybe a time-out or something at the most if in a public setting). so i have no idea what techniques they use or which books influence them. i suppose it would be an issue if i was witness to someone constantly disciplining their children in a manner that made me and my children uncomfortable (lots of yelling, shaming, spanking). that would be very uncomfortable for me. honestly though, i just never get glimpses of that. normally we are just supporting and surviving parenthood together.:)

[Mommy22alyns]

Just because a 3 y.o. isn't potty trained doesn't mean their parents are letting them sit in poop. That's an unfair blanket statement there.

 

I had one who trained at age 3, another at 18 months. Now I have another we are training right now at 2.5. With my first two I waited until they were ready and the transition from diapers to toilet was been smooth and effortless. The one I am forcing to train at 2.5 out of necessity has been a nightmare.

 

 

Agree. Just because your own kids trained early doesn't mean that there's bad parenting going on in the house of someone whose kids aren't trained by 3. Sylvia was a late trainer and I honestly don't appreciate the judgment. :confused:

[mytwomonkeys]

yea. my son potty trained at 3 too. i also let him ride in a stroller at walt disney world when he was five because he was too slow and tired too easily. :001_smile:

[Guest submarines]

Huh. Is a three year old in a diaper worse than a 2 yr old? How is their sitting in poop until a parent changes them worse at 3 than at 2 or one? Is it the perceived laziness of the parent that bugs you? Curious - and yes totally OT.

.

 

Or a 1 month old? FTR, most infants can be easily potty trained too.

[Daisy]

Most people I know who read the Pearl's actually USE balanced parenting. I'm not going to drop a friendship with someone just because they have the Pearl's book in their house. We have plenty of evidence just on this board that a person is capable of reading the Pearl's without becoming an abusive parent.

 

I'd drop a friendship with someone who militantly implemented everything the Pearl's advocate in their books without ever questioning it.

 

HUGE difference, imo.

 

But mostly it would be because I don't enjoy hanging out with people who can't think for themselves.

 

Ahh, but I'd probably come to the same conclusion with a foaming-at-the-mouth Dr. Sear's fan also.

[NanceXToo]

DD still not fully trained. she is 4. Am I a bit irritated? absolutely, am I gonna force her, absolutely no. She is changed as soon as she pooped. (She will announce it when she pooped. ) and I can assure she is not sitting in her poop.

 

I found there is no point to force a kid to potty trained if she doesn't feel like to. My pedi agreed that you never see a grown up still poop in their pants and forcing her will only cause her constipation. I rather spend the time and energy to teach my dd to read (who reads 2nd grade level) and do math (who does multiplication)

 

yes , she is 4 and she is not potty trained. I found your accusation of me neglecting of my child is neglecting of individual children personality

 

Don't let it get to you. My son didn't fully train until four because that's when HE was ready, and now that he's six you'd never know whether he trained at 4, 1, or yesterday. He did it, so what's the difference when? He's a bright, normal, happy kid. Don't even worry about it.

 

As for this post, I'd never knowingly be friendly with anybody who implemented parenting techniques like the Pearls.

Edited March 3, 2012 by NanceXToo

[kathymuggle]

yea. my son potty trained at 3 too. i also let him ride in a stroller at walt disney world when he was five because he was too slow and tired too easily. :001_smile:

 

I used a stroller at disney world as well. It had the added benefit of carrying our stuff!

 

My previous comment was about parents I personally know who are keeping kids from growing or maturing because of parental laziness (not due to being overwhelmed or having a different philosophy - but really down to parental laziness or self-centerredness). This implies a regular act by a parent for a child that is ready for growth.

 

You are lucky if you have never seen this.

 

It is hardly a judgment against strangers pushing their kids (even old ones) in a stroller - I don't know their story, nor is occasional use of strollers in a 5 year old necessarily bad.

[pdalley]

I'm allergic to legalism. The Pearls are extremely legalistic IMO. I would not mesh well with people who follow them.Yes, I've read the books. I think they might be useful for cleaning up after potty training dogs or perhaps lining a bird cage. (The books, I mean, not the Pearls.)

 

None of my boys were completely potty trained until they were close to four. It was a sensory issue. They couldn't feel the urge. I did not let them sit in their waste at four any more than I let them sit in their waste when they were younger. Yes, I consulted a Doctor. The fact remained that their nervous systems were not ready for potty training at a younger age.

[mytwomonkeys]

well, i can actually think of one similar example to what you've shared...but i'm too terrified to type it, lol. i will either offend someone here or the mom of that child will find this thread and know i'm talking about her:001_smile:. but yes - i do know what you mean in regard to parents not letting their kids grow up due to parental laziness. or in the case i'm thinking of...it is almost like they don't want their "baby" to stop being a baby, even though the child is nine.

 

fwiw, i didn't plan to even use a stroller at walt disney world...but my gosh, i would have paid $1,000 for the ones they rent out there. it saved our lives (and cost a fortune!) but it made the trip so much better!:D

 

 

I used a stroller at disney world as well. It had the added benefit of carrying our stuff!

 

My previous comment was about parents I personally know who are keeping kids from growing or maturing because of parental laziness (not due to being overwhelmed or having a different philosophy - but really down to parental laziness or self-centerredness). This implies a regular act by a parent for a child that is ready for growth.

 

You are lucky if you have never seen this.

 

It is hardly a judgment against strangers pushing their kids (even old ones) in a stroller - I don't know their story, nor is occasional use of strollers in a 5 year old necessarily bad.

[Laura Corin]

Agree. Just because your own kids trained early doesn't mean that there's bad parenting going on in the house of someone whose kids aren't trained by 3. Sylvia was a late trainer and I honestly don't appreciate the judgment. :confused:

 

Wasn't fully trained until he was almost five. He just didn't know what his body was about to do. It was part of a whole group of body planning problems: he was also bringing his feet together walking up stairs until he was four. I guess that makes me a bad parent.

 

The other child day trained at two and immediately insisted on giving up night-time nappies too. Had almost no accidents. I guess that makes me a good parent.

 

Hang on a minute....

 

Laura

[WeeBeaks]

I wouldn't base a friendship on like/dislike of a book. Most of my friends at least like parts of a book and dislike others. Nobody that I know of in my circle blindly follows every piece of advice in any book (um, including the bible).

 

I would probably draw the line if the child had some visible signs of abuse and/or child/parent said the abuse was caused by the parent.

 

I'm pretty frequently accused in my circles of abuse because I choose to vaccinate to a limited degree (poison them), eat fast food occasionally (the poison argument again) and medicate my ADHD and bipolar child (poison plus ADHD does exist anyway by their argument). So, by many here I'm a rotten parent and it has nothing to do with my discipline methods. But it's all in perspective. They don't want in my shoes and I don't walk in theirs. I live in a massively "crunchy," liberal community. Oh, my in-laws think I'm a bad parent because I don't fully vaccinate (they could die of disease) and always have this "crazy" list of stuff they are not allowed to feed the DC. So I couldn't win anyway. Someone would always be unhappy. ;)

 

And I'm not going to judge a parent on a 1/2 hour conversation either unless they openly state they are beating their kids.

[Pretty in Pink]

I wouldn't base a friendship on like/dislike of a book. Most of my friends atI'm pretty frequently accused in my circles of abuse because I choose to vaccinate to a limited degree (poison them), eat fast food occasionally (the poison argument again) and medicate my ADHD and bipolar child (poison plus ADHD does exist anyway by their argument). So, by many here I'm a rotten parent and it has nothing to do with my discipline methods. But it's all in perspective. They don't want in my shoes and I don't walk in theirs. I live in a massively "crunchy," liberal community. Oh, my in-laws think I'm a bad parent because I don't fully vaccinate (they could die of disease) and always have this "crazy" list of stuff they are not allowed to feed the DC. So I couldn't win anyway. Someone would always be unhappy. ;)

 

Sometimes you just can't win (well, you can, by deciding to let it all go in one ear and out the other, but that is sometimes easier said than done).

 

Yesterday at my daughter's check-up (she is almost 5 months old) the doctor we saw chastised me for not having her on solids yet. She has tried both rice cereal and bananas but just isn't very interested yet. The doctor said that her weight was below average and insinuated that it was my fault for not having her on solids. I had to insist that she look at my child's growth curve and admit that my daughter has maintained her weight and height percentiles since birth (FTR, she is at the 29th percentile for weight, so she's not exactly wasting away). Apparently that doctor feels I am holding my daughter back already.

 

I once knew a couple whose one year old still lived mostly off of formula because neither of her parents wanted to take the time to serve her anything else. A bottle was easy because they could just pass it off to her. I did and do consider that to be holding the child back.

 

I know that some people are disgusted by extended nursing and think that mothers who practice this are holding their children back, trying to keep them dependent and in baby mode, etc. It doesn't bother me though.

 

What about family beds? Some people think the concept is absurd. I once knew a couple that had three children, the eldest age 8, sleeping in their bed with them every. single. night. My husband thought it was too much, to put it mildly. Again, it didn't really bother me. They were the ones who had to split one queen sized bed five ways, after all. :D

 

One place I do draw the line, in my own relationships, is with physical abuse. If I see a mom whip out a little rod to spank her baby with, I'm out of that friendship yesterday. I saw a woman that I went to church with do this at a public library one day -- repeatedly swat her baby (not yet walking) for trying to scoot around instead of sitting still and listening to the story. When he cried she would do it again and correct him, "No crying! We obey mama cheerfully!" :001_huh: Um...no. That was too much for me.

 

I once knew a girl who corrected her children by slapping them hard on the backs of their heads. Preschooler touched the baby's toy? Slap. I will not be friends with someone like that.

 

I do have aquaintances who think the Pearls are 'all that' but, so far as I know, are not locking them outside, half naked, in freezing temperatures, forcing them to eat frozen vegetables. That's all well and good, but I know that they like the Pearls and I do not persue deeper relationships with them.

 

I have spanked in the past. I grew up with spanking and then some, to put it mildly. I am sure that colors my opinion. Hitting a child just hurts my heart and I can't enjoy friendships with people who use corporal punishment more than occasionally.

[kathymuggle]

 

fwiw, i didn't plan to even use a stroller at walt disney world...but my gosh, i would have paid $1,000 for the ones they rent out there. it saved our lives (and cost a fortune!) but it made the trip so much better!:D

 

I actually took the rental car to Walmart and bought a cheap one. The price and the line at DW drove was too much for me.

 

She actually got a bit sick towards the end of the trip - I ended up using the stroller in the airport too (beats carrying a sick 45 pounder)

[LucyStoner]

I'm allergic to legalism. The Pearls are extremely legalistic IMO. I would not mesh well with people who follow them.

 

Well-put.

[LucyStoner]

I have distanced myself from a few people over their personal beliefs.

 

One was a dad who decided he wasn't meant to be a father and left his wife and baby to become a raw diet found food freegan who lived in his car:confused:. After seeing him vomit up some sort of found grain in our friend's yard at a brunch gathering I said "no more". Oddly enough he is now remarried with about a zillion kids and lives on a farm. I only know this because I am still in touch with his ex.

 

Another was a couple who shared TMI about their bedroom activities. I found their sharing to be a form of voyeurism and we never invited them back.

 

I can't see myself clicking with a family that was into the Pearls- on top of their discipline ideas being abuse in my opinion, there is the whole patriarchy as the only acceptable form of marriage thing. My husband and I don't live our marriage like that and I can't see having a very good connection with those that did think that way.

[Dustybug]

Most people I know who read the Pearl's actually USE balanced parenting. I'm not going to drop a friendship with someone just because they have the Pearl's book in their house. We have plenty of evidence just on this board that a person is capable of reading the Pearl's without becoming an abusive parent.

 

I'd drop a friendship with someone who militantly implemented everything the Pearl's advocate in their books without ever questioning it.

 

HUGE difference, imo.

 

But mostly it would be because I don't enjoy hanging out with people who can't think for themselves.

 

Ahh, but I'd probably come to the same conclusion with a foaming-at-the-mouth Dr. Sear's fan also.

 

:iagree:

[Brilliant]

Nooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!

 

Not another thread about the Pearls!!!!!!!!!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

 

These things rarely end well...

 

I know...why do I keep opening them??

[awisha.]

I know...why do I keep opening them??

 

Because you are secretly hoping that someone has posted a kilt pic??

 

:auto:

[KungFuPanda]

[brett_ashley]

I haven't yet encountered someone I feel I can't be friendly towards because of their beliefs. I have a friend from high school who holds some seriously racist views, and I am still friends with her. My children have no contact with her, of course, but I still love her and care about what happens in her life.

 

My view of the Gospel means that I believe I am capable of every vile thing I can imagine, and it's only by God's grace that I am not a racist, child abuser, adulterer, etc. too.

[ByGrace3]

Had I read this question several months ago, I might have answered differently. However, some incidents in the last few months have brought me down a road that I have had to take some stands in this area. We do have friends that have and greatly like the Pearl book. When I asked them about some of the questionable material in it, they acted like they had never heard that in their life. Obviously, they missed a lot of what freaks me (and many of us!) out. :tongue_smilie: They don't parent the same way as we do, but their kids are happy, safe, and I don't think the parents are extreme in any way, so the fact that they own and have read the book does not disqualify them as friends or even as good parents. ;) We have A LOT of friends that follow Ezzo. Whenever I see a FB comment by a new parent about Babywise, I cringe. If they are a close friend I will message them a friendly warning, if they are not "close" I still give a more cryptic warning that gives them the opportunity to seek more information if they want it. That said, not all (or any that I know) of my friends that follow Ezzo are bad parents. Many of them try for a balanced approach. Not what I would do, but it doesn't make them bad parents.

 

I don't like the legalism of others and I don't want to be legalistic myself, so I do have friends that parent very differently, and many that is fine, but yes, I am finding there is a line.

 

I do think as the children of more gentle disciple/attachment parents and even reality discipline grow up, more people are taking notice. Just today my niece brought my great nephew down to stay with us for a week and she told me he needed "boot camp" while with me and that she probably needed to invest in a glue stick :ack2: She was shocked when I told her, actually we hardly ever spank my kids. When she picks him up there just might be a copy of Making Children Mind Without Losing Your and Parenting with Love and Logic in his bag. :lol:

Edited March 6, 2012 by ByGrace3

[catz]

Just because a 3 y.o. isn't potty trained doesn't mean their parents are letting them sit in poop. That's an unfair blanket statement there.

 

I had one who trained at age 3, another at 18 months. Now I have another we are training right now at 2.5. With my first two I waited until they were ready and the transition from diapers to toilet was been smooth and effortless. The one I am forcing to train at 2.5 out of necessity has been a nightmare.

 

Both my kids trained close to 3. I guess if you're locking the bathroom door and not allowing your child to train for your convenience would be a form of abuse. But I had a potty chair out and available from 12 months on. My kids both have some sensory quirks and sometimes new things are difficult for them even if they're fully capable, even now. Today I took my kids to a birthday party and my 7 year old completely flipped out because it was at a rock climbing place and there was no way she was putting a harness on. It takes a bunch of talking to get these 2 trying something new. Would I like these things to flow easier? Absolutely. Can I force? I've learned the hard way absolutely not. If you had kids trained at one - awesome. Kudos to you and your kids. I also had one of those kids that was reading and not potty trained.

 

I can't imagine judging a parent because their child isn't trained on your time table? For instance, my kids never had a pacifier but I don't care if that works for other parents. I don't spank my kids, but if that works for other families, carry on. I do think the Pearl's advice in the wrong hands and with their biblical basis can be dangerous.

 

Given that we're not Christian and are pretty crunchy, we don't attract too many Pearl followers.

Edited March 4, 2012 by kck

[Kirch]

 

One place I do draw the line, in my own relationships, is with physical abuse. If I see a mom whip out a little rod to spank her baby with, I'm out of that friendship yesterday. I saw a woman that I went to church with do this at a public library one day -- repeatedly swat her baby (not yet walking) for trying to scoot around instead of sitting still and listening to the story. When he cried she would do it again and correct him, "No crying! We obey mama cheerfully!" :001_huh: Um...no. That was too much for me.

 

:crying:

[SKL]

Apparently it wasn't obvious that I used the potty training issue as an example of accepting differences in parenting. I was saying that even though I could not remotely consider following a particular parenting choice, that does not mean I could not be friends with someone who does. Many of you took it to mean that I am disgusted by you people or whatever. Didn't even properly read what I wrote.

 

So. If I were a Pearl reader who does NOT abuse, I'm sure I'd be feeling about as good about your judgments as you feel about my mis-interpreted potty-training comments.

[SweetBean]

Thanks for clarifying :)

 

My number isn't three - and I try not to make assumptions because so many people have children with invisible special needs ( or are simply late bloomers)- but I do hear you.

 

I have known children who were not encouraged to take normal growing up steps because the parents were too lazy to deal with it. In my case it was a neighbour who kept putting her perfectly healthy and neurotypical 5 year old in a stroller because she walked too slow. She wheeled her to kindergarten in the stroller. :001_huh: I don't consider it abusive - but it was far from good parenting.

 

:iagree:

[Jean in Newcastle]

I guess that I've been very sheltered in my life. I've been around all sorts of people - some mentally ill, some criminal but I've only been around one person who was actually abusive to children that I know of. I've known of a number of people who have read the Pearl's and the Ezzo books. None of them had ever touched a plumbing line or used it on a baby or a child. The one person I know who was abusive did read the Pearls. She used her hand to slap her child across his face in my presence. I "called that person out" and told her that what she was doing was wrong. I told her that my children would no longer be playing at her house because it was not safe in my opinion. But we still maintained a friendship on the telephone. I did everything in my power to still reach out to that family and to help them to make better choices.

 

I've known countless parents of all parenting persuasions who have not been perhaps the best parents. The Ezzo parents that I know were in that category. Some tended to a rigidity that made me privately roll my eyes. But while they were too rigid and that rigidity had some negative impact on their kids, they were not actually abusive to their children. I've known other parents who were overly permissive to the point where it too had negative impact on their kids. But they were not actually abusive to their children either.

 

Other than the extremes, I don't really pay attention to how other people parent. I see happy kids, happy parents and I just enjoy their company. I hope that is what they see when they see my family too. I'm not perfect but I don't think that I sway to any extreme in parenting.

[Corraleno]

So again, where would you draw the line on ethical issues and friendship?

IMO, the idea that someone could be a "wonderful mom whose 'parenting style' just happens to involve hitting infants & beating kids," or "a really nice guy who occasionally beats his wife" is a complete oxymoron. I wouldn't be friends with anyone who hit, kicked, or otherwise abused pets, either. Anyone who thinks it's OK to physically (or verbally or emotionally) abuse their spouse, children, or animals is not someone I want to be involved with.

 

I would also not be friends with anyone who was racist, anti-semitic, homophobic, etc. In fact, I will pack up and leave family gatherings if a relative makes those kind of remarks. I want my kids to know that that sort of behavior is absolutely unacceptable — I don't care if it's just "senile old Uncle Joe." I don't care how old he is, or how he was brought up, I'm not going to sit there and listen to that bile, and neither are my kids.

 

I also draw the line at dishonesty, b*tchy gossiping, and attempts to manipulate or influence my kids behind my back.

 

Jackie

[Heather in Neverland]

IMO, the idea that someone could be a "wonderful mom whose 'parenting style' just happens to involve hitting infants & beating kids," or "a really nice guy who occasionally beats his wife" is a complete oxymoron. I wouldn't be friends with anyone who hit, kicked, or otherwise abused pets, either. Anyone who thinks it's OK to physically (or verbally or emotionally) abuse their spouse, children, or animals is not someone I want to be involved with.

 

I would also not be friends with anyone who was racist, anti-semitic, homophobic, etc. In fact, I will pack up and leave family gatherings if a relative makes those kind of remarks. I want my kids to know that that sort of behavior is absolutely unacceptable — I don't care if it's just "senile old Uncle Joe." I don't care how old he is, or how he was brought up, I'm not going to sit there and listen to that bile, and neither are my kids.

 

I also draw the line at dishonesty, b*tchy gossiping, and attempts to manipulate or influence my kids behind my back.

 

Jackie

 

:iagree:

[Joanne]

I would be at odds from a life and parenting standpoint with anyone who embraces, believes, supports, or feels comfortable with No Greater Joy materials.

 

It's not about "spanking" for me; I say it in every Pearl thread. It's about the punitive approach, the "adversarial assumption", the bad theology, and the cultishness.

[jillian]

I don't care to be friends with people who parent the Pearl way or anyone who is heavy-handed with corporal punishment. I tend to stay far away from those individuals.

This.

[dirty ethel rackham]

I would be at odds from a life and parenting standpoint with anyone who embraces, believes, supports, or feels comfortable with No Greater Joy materials.

 

It's not about "spanking" for me; I say it in every Pearl thread. It's about the punitive approach, the "adversarial assumption", the bad theology, and the cultishness.

 

:iagree: I ended a friendship with a woman who was constantly criticizing my parenting and re-framing my children's typical, age-appropriate, childish behavior as "evil" or "willful disobedience." FWIW, I didn't tolerate bad behavior so it was not like my kids were beating up on hers (more the other way around.) I supervised more closely in situations where I knew it would be harder to behave and I removed tired, crabby kids from difficult situations. Yet, her punitive approach did not make better behaved children. This woman would say that my kids were genetically messed up because they behaved well in spite of my "non-Biblical" parenting. Any time I tried to explain my approach, she acted as if I was the devil incarnate.

 

Funny, years later, she looked me up to ask advice when she was fostering-to-adopt. She wasn't allowed to use her punitive methods on these babies so she needed different tools. All of the sudden, my methods weren't so evil after all.

[Jennifer3141]

I don't care to be friends with people who parent the Pearl way or anyone who is heavy-handed with corporal punishment. I tend to stay far away from those individuals.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree: