Can We Talk about the Pearls Here?

[Scarlett]

That's a wonderful saying!

 

 

I think it is Maya Angelou.

[unsinkable]

I see the adoptive incentive add-in as the same sort of thing. Without those adoption incentives, many families (such as myself!) could not afford to adopt and raise special needs kiddos. I have four...only two came with assistance, and they weren't even the expensive ones! Also, having run an adoptive agency placing special needs kiddos in homes, I can say that the incensives only barely cover expenses, if that. The agencies are most definitely NOT making money on this deal.

 

Tragic. Awful beyond words. Abusive without question AND most likely preventable. To be blamed on adoption incentives or the Pearls? Nope...faulty logic, there. Blame should be placed where it belongs...on the abusive parents and the social workers who let him stay in that home.

 

 

Perhaps I read the article too quickly but I thought the criticism was about the incentive the agency received for placing a child. And because of the money, the agency placed the children w/o making sure the home was safe and appropriate.

[Kelli in TN]

I would like to hear a babywise story. I have never heard of any of this stuff. I just know that we cannot talk about the pearls on other groups.

 

Okay, since my French bread is still rising I guess I have time.

 

I had 3 children at the time. Three children that I had successfully nursed in spite of a lack of support from the older women in my life. I had my handy dandy copy of The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding (love that book!!) by my bedside and I knew my stuff. Shoot. Other moms asked me for advice with their nursing woes. I was a smart cookie when it came to that nursing baby business. I understand the supply and demand principle of milk supply, knew the remedies for the different pain issues, I was good at this nurturing babies business.

 

But by the time #4 came along we were at a different church. And most of the parents at this church had a different idea about parenting infants. I soon learned that my old standby book, The Womanly Art...., was the key to permissive parenting and ill behaved kids. I learned that if babies are not on schedules they will grow up to be adults who cannot control their impulses. Oh. My. So a mom, seeing my confused state, loaned me Babywise during my fourth pregnancy.

 

I followed it dutifully. My son was 10 lbs 14 oz. at birth and pretty hungry. But we stayed on schedule. He gained weight just fine for the first six months. But then my cycle returned, my milk dried up and even though I returned to my beloved Womanly Art book, no trick would bring the milk back. I was devastated. I am one of those moms who really, really puts a high value on long term nursing. I was crushed and I felt like I had been misled and lied to.

 

My last two babies were nursed according to the wisdom I had possessed before getting side tracked by that crazy Ezzo book. Ah, sweet success.

[Twinmom]

Nope. They are not to blame. I am to blame. All the damage, all the brokeness, all the ruined childhood years. The joyful childhood that was stolen from my kids was stolen by me. I am not blaming the Pearls.

 

I just think their teachings are dreadful and hatefilled. But God entrusted these children to me and I ruined their childhoods. I know full well where the blame lies.

 

Oh, Kelli, I'm so sorry. That's just awful. I hadn't read it when I posted my previous message or I would have commented on your obviously painful situation. You have my prayers and my heart goes out to you.

 

:grouphug:

 

Completely separate comment from my note to Kelli:

 

I used the Ezzo's Babywise books exclusively with my four kiddos and had a great time with them. Worked like a charm with all four of my very different kiddos from very different biological backgrounds. IMO, if you surface read the book and are overly strict about it, yes, it can be taken too far. However, even Ezzo says not to do that, if you really read the book and not just the subtitles. He always says to be flexible for the needs of the child as long as you work with the basic idea of the schedule. It's sort of like what SWB says about the WTM. It's a course to follow, not something to be a slave to. Ezzo says to follow the basic ideas but not to do something that doesn't work for your child and family.

 

Personally, I think the Pearls sound a bit scary (though I have no firsthand experience with them), but the Ezzos made a lot of common sense to me. For the type of person that doesn't easily work with gray areas and isn't confident enough to be flexible, I'd not recommend the Ezzos. Too easy to be too literal and go overboard, IMO.

[Mrs Mungo]

I used the Ezzo's Babywise books exclusively with my four kiddos and had a great time with them. Worked like a charm with all four of my very different kiddos from very different biological backgrounds. IMO, if you surface read the book and are overly strict about it, yes, it can be taken too far. However, even Ezzo says not to do that, if you really read the book and not just the subtitles. He always says to be flexible for the needs of the child as long as you work with the basic idea of the schedule. It's sort of like what SWB says about the WTM. It's a course to follow, not something to be a slave to. Ezzo says to follow the basic ideas but not to do something that doesn't work for your child and family.

 

Have you heard any of the lectures by the Ezzos? Their mainstream books have been whitewashed for public consumption. Their worldview is extremely similar to the Pearls.

[Twinmom]

Perhaps I read the article too quickly but I thought the criticism was about the incentive the agency received for placing a child. And because of the money, the agency placed the children w/o making sure the home was safe and appropriate.

 

No, I think that is just what the article tried to imply. A journalistic twist, I might say if I was being kind! I'm just saying that in my experience, the money adoption agencies get for placing special needs kiddos barely covers the bills...it is not generally making any money as is implied by the article. There is always the exception, of course, and there is always the poor job done by an inadequate social worker or a downright uncaring one to consider. I just say that we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater...adoption incentives for the most part get these kiddos the care they need. Most can't afford to adopt special needs kiddos with their high medical bills, etc. without the help, nor can agencies afford to do the routine recruitment and supervision work without having their expenses covered.

 

I would fault the agency here for the poor job they did in screening and supervising this family, but I'm just not so quick to blame it on the incentive. So, I think we are basically in agreement here.

[Twinmom]

Oops, my first double post! So sorry...

[Kelli in TN]

 

Just curious - you don't have to answer - have you talked to your kids about it? What has their reaction been?

 

The two who are the stronger, more resilient of the older kids forgave me without needing to talk it out. Forgiveness is just part of their dna, I guess.

 

My most fragile child is the one who suffered the most extreme emotional abuse and physical punishments. Maybe physical abuse? Maybe I lack the courage to face that monster in myself? Anyway, the road to healing has been a curvy, bumpy path for her. But she is further down the road than she was a year ago and further down the road than I ever expected her to be. She and I have talked a lot about her destroyed childhood.

 

She comes around. She calls me a lot. We have each put up the boundaries with one another that we need to survive, and then we love each other through and because of those boundaries. It is turning into a pretty healthy relationship after all.

 

But if there were really time travel I would take her back and do childhood over again and it would resemble the childhood her three youngest siblings are having right now.

[Nakia]

Kelli,

I just wanted to send you a big hug! :grouphug:

[Happy]

I don't mean where did the idea of spanking itself come up. I realize that the Bible does mention corporal punishment in Proverbs. I do interpret that as a command in Scripture, which I know many disagree with.

 

But what I'm wondering where this *particular approach* to spanking comes from as I read these articles by the Pearls, and as I think about Christian culture where this is the predominant model-- basically the idea of spanking with an instrument, having a calm attitude, praying with the child afterward, hugging and showing affection, etc. That's so widely accepted as "the way to parent" by so many of us, and yet, the Bible doesn't say anything about *how* corporal punishment is to be carried out.

 

Does anyone know who first popularized this approach? I don't think Christians in past times and in other areas of the world have had this particular approach, although spanking itself has always been used. I'm just wondering where this particular mindset came from, that is so prominent in America's conservative Christian families.

 

Erica

 

It was popularized by James Dobson in 'Dare to Discipline' and 'Strong-Willed Child.' But he emphasized a very loving approach. I remember my sis in law talking about it and using the approach in a firm, but very loving manner. All three of hers turned out delightful. I took a wishy-washing approach to parenting (mostly because I'm a creative right-brained dreamer) and one of mine turned out horribly. I wish I could have some of those years back. We were either too harsh or not firm enough. My second son is doing better than the first because I've grown up.

[Scarlett]

Have you heard any of the lectures by the Ezzos? Their mainstream books have been whitewashed for public consumption. Their worldview is extremely similar to the Pearls.

 

I have not. Have you? I'm curious if they really do teach that nursing babies should only be nursed at a preset time and not on demand. I didn't get that from the book I read, but someone here told me I must have had the revised edition.

[Twinmom]

Have you heard any of the lectures by the Ezzos? Their mainstream books have been whitewashed for public consumption. Their worldview is extremely similar to the Pearls.

 

Nope, sure haven't! I'd be interested to hear/see some of those and see how they compare to the books. The books worked for me, but like I said, I can see how the information might be construed as abusive. Perhaps the potentially "white-washed" version I read doesn't go as far as what you've heard!

 

And, please Kelli, if you are reading this, please do NOT in any way construe my comments about the Ezzos working for me as a comment on what you've said! We cross-posted...I'm not commenting on your deal at all. What I read when I read your post is a story about a lot of women who should have minded their own business and left a good momma to mother her own children her own way! I'm sorry you went through that. I'd also have to add that I was not a breastfeeding momma (hard to do that when you adopt! ;)), so for me it was just about structure and routine, not milk production. A much easier deal, I'd have to say.

 

Again, you have my prayers and please don't blame yourself for the stupidity of others. I believe from your posts that you are an awesome mom, and I've actually tried to emulate you in some areas but just haven't told you! Specifically, I keep on thinking about your long ago comment about telling your kiddos in the morning, "let's go learn you something!" I've been doing that with my kiddos, and it makes school a lot more fun.

[Mrs Mungo]

I have not. Have you? I'm curious if they really do teach that nursing babies should only be nursed at a preset time and not on demand. I didn't get that from the book I read, but someone here told me I must have had the revised edition.

 

Yes, I've heard several of their lectures on tape. It really made me sick.

[Scarlett]

But if there were really time travel I would take her back and do childhood over again and it would resemble the childhood her three youngest siblings are having right now.

 

FWIW, I think it is pretty common in families with lots of kids for things to be handled much differently with the younger set than the older set. My best friend is the middle child of 5 and the oldest 2 says their dad was a totally different father to them than he was to the youngers. And my friend....well, she felt some of both...I guess cause she was in the middle. It only makes sense, because parents are humans and as we mature and gain insight and maturity naturally we will do things differently. Unless we're stupid. ;)

[Plucky]

It was popularized by James Dobson in 'Dare to Discipline' and 'Strong-Willed Child.' But he emphasized a very loving approach. I remember my sis in law talking about it and using the approach in a firm, but very loving manner. All three of hers turned out delightful. I took a wishy-washing approach to parenting (mostly because I'm a creative right-brained dreamer) and one of mine turned out horribly. I wish I could have some of those years back. We were either too harsh or not firm enough. My second son is doing better than the first because I've grown up.

 

 

Happy don't blame yourself too much. Kids can make choices, too. We don't entirely shape them with our parenting. They are not balls of clay that we can mold. They are put on this earth with their own personality and biological tendencies. We can certainly influence their lives but I don't think that the average loving, bumbling parent can be held responsible for everything in their child's lives. Some kids just have it harder based on their personalities.

[Kelli in TN]

I'd also have to add that I was not a breastfeeding momma (hard to do that when you adopt! ;)), so for me it was just about structure and routine, not milk production. A much easier deal, I'd have to say.

 

Again, you have my prayers and please don't blame yourself for the stupidity of others. I believe from your posts that you are an awesome mom, and I've actually tried to emulate you in some areas but just haven't told you! Specifically, I keep on thinking about your long ago comment about telling your kiddos in the morning, "let's go learn you something!" I've been doing that with my kiddos, and it makes school a lot more fun.

 

I can actually see the scheduling being a good thing for a bottle feeding mom. After all the bottle does not need the stimulation to produce formula. And when you are bottle feeding you can measure the formula and you can know how much the baby got and you can increase as the baby grows.

 

With nursing there are more variables and there is so much potential to lose that milk supply if you try to apply rules to it.

 

And thank you for you kind comment. Very sweet. I need that today as my sullen 13 year old who will not have any electronic priveliges this week sits across the room staring at me and thinking I am an evil witch.

[Quiver0f10]

FWIW, I think it is pretty common in families with lots of kids for things to be handled much differently with the younger set than the older set. My best friend is the middle child of 5 and the oldest 2 says their dad was a totally different father to them than he was to the youngers. And my friend....well, she felt some of both...I guess cause she was in the middle. It only makes sense, because parents are humans and as we mature and gain insight and maturity naturally we will do things differently. Unless we're stupid. ;)

 

 

Oh, definitely! My older kids are always telling us how spoiled the younger two are and that would have never gotten away with XYZ :D I have just learned to relax and pick my battles. Life is too short.

[bkpan]

Nope. They are not to blame. I am to blame. All the damage, all the brokeness, all the ruined childhood years. The joyful childhood that was stolen from my kids was stolen by me. I am not blaming the Pearls.

 

I just think their teachings are dreadful and hatefilled. But God entrusted these children to me and I ruined their childhoods. I know full well where the blame lies.

 

Kelli, I'm so sorry. I really wasn't pointing any fingers. :grouphug:

 

Kim

[Twinmom]

And thank you for you kind comment. Very sweet. I need that today as my sullen 13 year old who will not have any electronic priveliges this week sits across the room staring at me and thinking I am an evil witch.

 

Another sign of a good mom, that one! Stick to your guns, Momma, and don't let that evil eye get you down! All strong parents get that every once in a while...for me, I take it as confirmation that I am doing my job!

:grouphug:

[Greta]

I don't follow the Pearls. I don't hate them or think they are evil abuse advocates, either. I think they would be sickened to hear of these abuse cases. I wonder how the slander is going to affect their ministry and their lives.

 

When I first heard some accusations against the Pearls (I should probably note that I had never heard of them before that time) I thought that surely it was being blown out of proportion, and that their advice couldn't possibly be that bad. I was told that the entire text of one of their books was available for free online, so I read it to see for myself what all the fuss was about. And I discovered that I was wrong. It really was that bad. There were a number of things about that book which I found deeply and profoundly disturbing, to the point that I believe a reasonable case could be made that they are in fact advocating child abuse. And I don't believe it is slander to say so. Here are some of the teachings which I believe are deeply harmful to children:

 

1. Striking babies and children who are far too young to understand or to be in control of their behavior. (I feel it is nothing less than cruel to punish someone for something over which they do not have control.)

 

2. Deliberately baiting children into misbehavior so that you can punish them. (This, to me, is a horrid violation of the trust on which the parent-child bond is built.)

 

3. Advocating breaking a child's will. (How can we raise our children to be complete adults in control of their lives, if we break their wills? Without a will of their own, anyone with a strong will who comes into their lives would be able to control, manipulate, or even abuse them.)

 

4. Perhaps most telling, and most disturbing of all, no limits were recommended with regard to how hard or how many times a parent should hit their child, and in fact, disturbing words like these were used:

 

" . . . wait a moment, and again lecture him, and again spank him."

 

"The exhortation is to not let their crying cause you to lighten up on the intensity or duration of the spanking."

 

"A general rule is to continue the disciplinary action until the child is surrendered."

 

"Defeat him totally. Accept no conditions for surrender. No compromise."

 

"If the crying turns to a true, wounded, submissive whimper, you have conquered; he has submitted his will. If the crying is still defiant, protesting and other than a response to pain, spank him again. If this is the first time he has come up against someone tougher than he, it may take awhile."

 

These four things go against every instinct I have as a parent. I ran screaming from the Pearls and I haven't looked back.

[Happy]

Happy don't blame yourself too much. Kids can make choices, too. We don't entirely shape them with our parenting. They are not balls of clay that we can mold. They are put on this earth with their own personality and biological tendencies. We can certainly influence their lives but I don't think that the average loving, bumbling parent can be held responsible for everything in their child's lives. Some kids just have it harder based on their personalities.

 

Thank you. Sometimes the regrets swamp us moms. Nice of you to toss a PDF to me.

 

I believe this, too. The cloth the child is made out of is a part of the equation.

 

I'm pretty bold in saying that by the time you are 25, it ain't your parent's fault anymore. :D:D:D You, and only you, have the ability to choose the type of life you will live. My son has two more years to the cut off. :D And he is doing better, much, much better. My dear bil was still bad mouthing his parents, whom I loved and respected, as a grown man of 40-something. It was past time to get over it already by then.

 

Edited to add...in getting over it, remember that parents are human and make mistakes. My dh was able to accept that his parents would have raised them differently had they known any other way. My dh did that at about age 25. But, then I knew he was a mature kinda guy when I married him.

[Ellie]

What I don't understand about the Pearls (and other books I've read about spanking) is that you only spank after you've calmed down. That just seems so cruel. If you've both calmed down and talked about it and the child seems contrite, why then go ahead with the spanking? Why not let the talk be it?

 

Do the Pearls really advocate spanking (or switching) a child at 12 - 18 months? Wow. At that age children often just don't have the impulse control. It's our job as parents to distract them or take them out of a situation rather than switch them.

 

I get so sad when I read about spanking because I just can't imagine using it as a discipline tool (and, yes, I have an extremely spirited child myself!).

 

The Pearls don't say to spank after you've calmed down. The Pearls use little swats as correction--short and to the point--and then they move on. They don't make a big production of A Spanking.

 

I have swatted a 10month old, for having a temper tantrum. When I would tell her "no" for any reason she would fall down on the floor and whine. I did all the things the "experts" say to do, and it only became worse. Finally, I picked her up and swatted on her well-padded bottom, and she never did it again. I also smacked little hands to teach them not to touch things; if they were old enough to reach for something, they were old enough to learn not to.

[Plucky]

Oh, yes. I know those regrets. Very wise post, Happy. ITA.

[Phred]

I have read the Pearls' books on child-rearing and I honestly do not remember them recommending using plumbing line. Regarding the switch....They do recommend switching the kids, but I thought it didn't start til around 12-18 mos old. And that is when the kids are old enough to know what NO means. I call that negative reinforcement.

I call that hitting a child with a stick. But read on...

 

There was a time when it was normal for children to be spanked or switched. My dad use to talk about having to go out to the barn to get his own switch. And you know what. He and his brothers and sisters grew up to be well-adjusted, contributing members of society. And they were NOT abused.

 

In those days children were more obedient & well-behaved. And there were fewer discipline problems, children running wild, teens running the streets, and juvenile hall was MUCH smaller. Schools were more productive too. Johnny didn't have ADD, Johnny knew to keep his trap shut and his butt in his chair. *I* have ADD, without the hyperactivity component, and I made it through school without getting in trouble. *I* would get a whuppin when I got home. (Please don't slam me about ADD. It is real, I know, but it is also WAY overdiagnosed in the public schools).

That's a Disney way of looking at things. But it's not exactly correct. While it's true the juvenile halls were less crowded, it's because there were fewer of them and a lot less people. Judges didn't sentence kids there... they were sent to "industrial schools for boys" where parents could also just abandon their kids when they got out of control. They were "incorrigible". Teachers and principals could give students a good whack... but that's not what kept kids in their chairs. It was the fear of the parents at home and what they'd do when they heard you were out of line. Today the parent is likely to go to the school and yell at the teacher.

 

I know you really want to see the past as this wonderful place where all was just peachy... but it was just like today. There were good kids and bad kids. Beating them never changed the bad ones into good ones then and it doesn't today. The main difference between then and now was that then, with towns being smaller and such, you knew everyone. A teenager might get a job with the local butcher. But if he stole something from the local store, nobody would hire him. And again, the major difference was that parents took the side of other adults, not the kids. So when someone called up the parents they knew the kid would be punished. So they likely didn't call the cops.

 

Now... a shopowner doesn't know the kid, doesn't know their parents and wouldn't call them if he did. Repercussions? So Home Depot won't hire you... Loews will. This is the world of capitalism and 100 million vs. 300 million people. Hitting your toddler isn't going to change that.

 

 

I do beleive in spanking. I have a strong-willed child and spanking is the only thing that has worked for her. Do I beleive in abuse? Nope. Does she get abused? Nope. She gets stinging spanks, usually one, sometimes 2, depending on the offense. And she is no longer a wild, tantruming child. (Her longest tantrum was about 3 1/2 hours). She is a well-mannered little girl who is obedient in public. She does not run from me, back talk or yell at me. Her and her sister do really well together. She still pouts occasionally, but it has been a while since she's had a full-blown tantrum.

And... sometimes you have to do what you have to do. But not because someone says it's the right way to raise your kids so do it for offenses just because. I also understand being pushed into a corner by a kid to whom other punishments mean nothing.

 

We also talk alot. We talk about why we should and shouldn't do things. We talk about why we are spanking. We talk about how other people feel. Do other people want to listen to you? Would you like it if someone did that to you? If you run here, could you run into someone? THen what would happen? Would you like that? And so on, and so on.

 

And that's what we do.

I make a huge production of a spanking. If the rules are broken to the extent that such a thing is required I make the child follow me upstairs to my bedroom or theirs... I sit on the floor, they bend over my lap. And then I'll usually just tap 'em. 'cause the blubbering that's been going on the whole way up the stairs has been more than punishment enough. By age three there's usually no more need to spank them anymore.

 

What gets me is the institutionalized spanking recommended by these folks. It's begging for something bad to happen. Well guess what.

[Cheryl in NM]

One thing that strikes me as insane about the Pearls is the spanking slowly, stopping every few swats and incorporating math lessons with the spanking. That and the eery calmness that she seems to portray. I can imagine a child become a sociopath raised with that kind of training/chastening/punishment...whatever words you want to use. What could be worse that teaching a child to show no emotion while you are causing someone pain? Or for that matter to show no emotion when you are dissapointed. Their kids might be part of their ministry now, but I wouldn't be surprisd if they weren't part of it forever. Otherwise, the Pearl children were just indoctrinated and will continue the abuse on their children.

 

FWIW, I do agree with spanking.

[Julie in CA]

I'm just wondering....:confused::confused:Do you not use punctuation? I'm sorry to say this but I have a really hard time reading your posts. (There have been other times where I've just given up....and I'd like to hear what you have to say.)

 

Penny...I'm sure you didn't mean this to sound rude, just wanted to mention that it might be more polite (if you feel you absolutely must comment on someone's grammar in an open forum) to send a private message. You probably sounded harsher than you meant to...I didn't pm you about this because I want the poster you were quoting to feel supported.

Thanks,

Julie :001_smile:

[Kelli in TN]

 

I have swatted a 10month old, for having a temper tantrum. When I would tell her "no" for any reason she would fall down on the floor and whine. I did all the things the "experts" say to do, and it only became worse. Finally, I picked her up and swatted on her well-padded bottom, and she never did it again. I also smacked little hands to teach them not to touch things; if they were old enough to reach for something, they were old enough to learn not to.

 

I have done this too. But I still think the Pearls have jumped aboard the crazy train. And this parenting is NOT what was taught in those seminars.

[Pensguys]

Penny...I'm sure you didn't mean this to sound rude, just wanted to mention that it might be more polite (if you feel you absolutely must comment on someone's grammar in an open forum) to send a private message. You probably sounded harsher than you meant to...I didn't pm you about this because I want the poster you were quoting to feel supported.

Thanks,

Julie :001_smile:

 

No, Julie, i didn't mean for it to sound rude....depends on how you read it. If I had said "Do you not USE punct?" It would have been rude. I actually forgot we have a PM there for awhile.....we didn't used to and we would post what we needed to. I added the part about WANTING to hear what she has to say, hoping to soften to tone of the post.

 

I'm not the only one who has said something like this "in public"....maybe it was before PMs though. :001_smile:

[elegantlion]

I make a huge production of a spanking. If the rules are broken to the extent that such a thing is required I make the child follow me upstairs to my bedroom or theirs... I sit on the floor, they bend over my lap. And then I'll usually just tap 'em. 'cause the blubbering that's been going on the whole way up the stairs has been more than punishment enough. By age three there's usually no more need to spank them anymore.

 

What gets me is the institutionalized spanking recommended by these folks. It's begging for something bad to happen. Well guess what.

 

:iagree: I count on one hand the number of times we have had to spank our son, and he's almost 11. In fact, I can't remember the last time we had to spank. My dh has handled it much in the same manner.

[Julie in CA]

Yep, Penny,

I figured you just must have forgotten. Isn't it nice to have the extra features on this board? :-)

[Michelle in MO]

by the Pearls once, and I have to admit that it made me very, very uncomfortable. I browsed through it, but honestly did not like what I saw, so I never read the book. It wasn't a book on discipline, however, but on women submitting to their husbands. I'm not challenging the notion of a man's godly leadership in the family, but I also believe there are plenty of Biblical checks and balances that need to be followed in a good marriage.

 

To me, one of the larger issues is that I personally believe that there's an element of "legalism" there that I find very disturbing. I haven't read all of the posts, so I don't know if that's come up in this discussion.

 

Added later: To be fair, I've never read their book on discipline, and only glanced through the other. I didn't mean to divert the topic of this thread. I just remember that I didn't like what I saw in the other book, but I've never actually read either. Just wanted everyone to be clear on this; it's probably best if I don't comment at all!

[Pensguys]

Yep, Penny,

I figured you just must have forgotten. Isn't it nice to have the extra features on this board? :-)

 

Yes, it is! I especially like the thread subscriptions....now back to our local postings. ;)

[Jean in Newcastle]

I have gotten some benefit from both the Pearls and the Babywise book. But - I read their materials with discretion and only chose to use those things that seemed to be of benefit to me.

 

From the Pearls:

 

1. I like the idea of "tying heart-strings" that was talked about in one of their books (I think it was the "Train up Your Child" book). What they talked about was taking the time to sit down with your child and mend the relationship when things had gotten "off" between you.

 

2. I learned that it was much more important to train your child in what he/she should do instead of just focusing on what he/she shouldn't do.

 

3. I learned (in a series of articles on kids "jumping ship") that it is important to have fun with your children and to let them see that living a godly life is a blast instead of a dark dreary thing (that they would love to get away from as soon as they can).

 

From Babywise:

 

1. I learned that having a routine (not a schedule tied to the clock) is a beneficial thing for me and my baby and made things easier for us in the toddler years. I did not make my babies wait to eat if they were hungry.

[Colleen]

"(I)f all parents practiced child training as I have suggested, there wouldn’t be any need for abnormal psychologists or child protection agencies. A lot of people would move on to more practical kinds of work, and there wouldn’t be any more crime or war." ~ M. Pearl

 

Sure, I can ride my high-and-mighty horse with the best of 'em, but c'mon...Claiming that my parenting style, adopted by all parents, will rid the world of crime and war? Good grief. I have friends who say they sift through the Pearls insights, keeping what they perceive to be the nuggets of wisdom and and tossing the rest. But panning for gold shouldn't have to involve wading through ****.;)

[Colleen]

"(I)f all parents practiced child training as I have suggested, there wouldn’t be any need for abnormal psychologists or child protection agencies. A lot of people would move on to more practical kinds of work, and there wouldn’t be any more crime or war." ~ M. Pearl

 

Sure, I can ride my high-and-mighty horse with the best of 'em, but c'mon...Claiming that my parenting style, adopted by all parents, will rid the world of crime and war? Good grief. I have friends who say they sift through the Pearls insights, keeping what they perceive to be the nuggets of wisdom and and tossing the rest. But panning for gold shouldn't have to involve wading through sh*t.;)

[Colleen]

nt

[Crissy]

Look at that! I feel so strongly about it, I posted twice! ;-) nt

 

That's okay. That last sentence was worth reading twice! :D

[LisaKinVA]

I too have read the Pearl's books... about 8 years ago. We started off that path, but at one specific point 5 years ago my heart changed.

 

There was a moment, when, following the Pearl's doctrine to spank until my child willfully submitted, I stopped myself -- I could see in myself what it was doing to me! I had a sick feeling of pride that I was "breaking" my child and it scared me. It was perverse, and I KNEW it.

 

This is not the relationship I wanted with my son, or any other child. And that was NOT the mother I wanted to be. I wanted my children to obey me out of respect and love, not out of blind fear.

 

We do have a switch -- but it is only used in 2 circumstances -- lying and outright defiance. I have learned the correct amount of "force" by using the switch on myself. It's more of a flick of the wrist (stings on bare legs), not a swing of the arm (leaves welts).

 

We very rarely spank anymore. We have days where we have neither spankings, nor time-outs. We are still not perfect about our discipline, and my children aren't perfect -- but we are all learning as we grow.

 

I will say, the biggest issue for any form of discipline is consistency. From my children, I have gotten as much or more out of a consistently used time-out as we ever did from spanking for every wrongdoing.

[VaKim]

The Pearl's bad theology is the basis of their messed up child "training" ideas. They believe that you can be perfect and sinless if you "kill" the flesh.

 

http://allthings2all.blogspot.com/2005/09/michael-and-debi-pearls-no-greater-joy_30.html

[sassenach]

That's okay. That last sentence was worth reading twice! :D

 

That last sentence gave me my very first ACTUAL LOL moment on this board. Well said!

[CLHCO]

Personally, I think anyone that writes a book about spanking should enter in it with a great deal of fear and trembling. In the hands of a disturbed individual it can be very dangerous.

 

I have never seen Michael Pearl fear or tremble over anything. He's an ego. I will admit I'm almost an expert at taking meat and spitting out the bones so I've benefited by a part or two of something he may say. However, he is a unique personality with a dry sense of humor and has a family interwoven by that personality. His children grew up to carry on his message so they obviously didn't rebel and grow to hate him.

 

That said, it's very naive to believe for a second that anyone has a "method" that should be used by all. Honestly, if we spanked and grinned like he does it would be so against our nature that our children would view it as sadistic. We'd have to almost become sadistic to do it. The result would be almost the opposite in our hands with the very same "method".

 

I think there is a good reason why the Bible does not give a 7, 8 or 12-step program to proper child chastisement. People want black and white answers to such things but that takes the person out of the equation and we can't do that in discipline. Every person is different, every need is different, and every misbehavior is going to need evaluating based on intent, past expectations or faults, etc.

 

I've seen methods that say things like:

 

 

Send your child to room

 

Tell child to confess

 

Have child bend over

 

Administer the spanking in a slow, steady manner

 

Ask child once again if they recall what they did and discuss what part of the God's word they broke

 

Pray with child for forgiveness from God

 

Have child go ask forgiveness of whomever else was offended

 

 

Strangely enough, I can see some very calm, proper and perhaps a bit uptight families with extreme type-A people - children included - having something like this be the comfort of commitment and routine they need provided the spankings were not damaging. I couldn't make it through the "confess" part and the "bend over" would have all of our loud, forward personalities in such a state of horrid confusion there would be abuse!

 

There is this thing called DNA. Parents pass it on to their children so you do find very loud ones with strong personalities and then you have the calm ones who make it seem like the loud ones are disciplining wrong and they're right. That's not necessarily the case.

 

I'm not anti-spankings myself but I admit I agree completely with Joanne who, in the past, said that people really must take the focus OFF of spanking, especially with the books from people you don't personally know. The Bible mentions it only a few times throughout that really, really big bunch of books, but it doesn't dwell on it with a 12 step program for all. Parents do need some guidelines today but the 12 steps to better children mindset, though far more concrete for the lazy, can lead to trouble in the wrong hands.

 

The Pearls made it the focus and people who do not match their little world of personality and psychological profiling actually used the method and it blew up in their faces.

[nmoira]

 

The Pearls don't say to spank after you've calmed down. The Pearls use little swats as correction--short and to the point--and then they move on. They don't make a big production of A Spanking.

Yes, they do; they advocate starting "corporal punishment" (as opposed to hitting/swatting/switching that is "not punishment") at 2.5-3.5, depending on the child. It's all here.

[Joanne]

Blaming the Pearls for what happened to that little boy is really no different than blaming it on the homeschooling. The cause of the child's abuse was an abusive mother, who herself had an abusive childhood.

 

This I agree with.

 

They do not advocate EVER disciplining a child in anger, leaving marks on a child, or assaulting the dignity of a child. They DO emphasize the necessity of joy in a family and in training the children.

 

And now I will try to respectfully part company.

 

There is nothing of benefit to the Pearl's advice that is not 1) common sense or 2) found elsewhere.

 

There is much of concern to me regarding the Pearls and any other parents or Leaders who believe in spanking and other punishment as the main training and discipline tool.

 

I *don't* want this to be a "spanking" debate from my post. I'm not talking about spanking. Spanking is to vague of a term to evaluate or judge. People who spank their child for running into the street and those who blanket train babies using spanking are all "spankers". The Dad who spanked his child a couple of times under the age of 5 is a spanker; so is the woman who spanks her child repeatedly at WalMart.

 

What bothers me about spanking in parenting is this:

 

1) The ritual we recommend and readily accept as a culture, frequently as a Christian culture is man made; not Man made. It's *extra* Biblical.

 

2) There is nothing in scripture that says "spank". It says to beat your older child across the back with a rod; he will not die. Yet literalists figuratively change the words and then insist people read it to say/mean "spank" as we've come to know it.

 

3) The hyper focus on spanking prohibits the development of more, effective, additional and positive discipline tools. Note I said "the hyper focus on spanking", not spanking itself which I've already said is vague.

 

On the Pearls:

 

1) They are seductive. Truly, they have a way of wooing vulnerable people into wholeheartedly adopting their ideas so that they can create God fearing, saved, obedient children. Spanking won't save a child. Punishment won't save a child. Discipline won't save a child. Only knowing your need of our Savior, asking for his love, surrendering to Him and receiving the Holy Spirit saves. Not Michael Pearl.

 

2) Their advice to abused women in general, to families whose fathers/husbands have sexually or otherwise abused and to women in general is dangerous.

 

3) Michael Pearl is condescending, arrogant and rude in tone. Thank you, but I have my own supply.

 

4) The have developed and exploited a nearly cultish following.

 

5) Systematic, spanking based and backed training is creepy parenting. Life supplies plenty of "no" opportunities. To manufacture them for babies is simply sick.

 

The theology of the Pearls is suspect, dangerous and graceless.

 

The parenting recommended is abusive.

[Ashleen]

He also demonstrated how to sit a child on your lap to read a story to him or her. During this sweet bonding time it is very important to make sure you have your handy dandy switch nearby because as soon as you the child gets the wiggles you need to be ready to immediately swat a couple of good ones across his legs. Because you are the parent and by golly he is going to enjoy story time with you whether he likes it or not.

 

I read this part out loud to my husband and we discussed it before I even got to the part of the thread where someone else mentioned creepy sexual overtones (something about a well-salivated husband). This is creepy to me. A man who has a disciplinary method for *forcing* a child to sit on his lap whether the child wants to or not...that just raises every kind of red flag for me. Blech.

[Lisa at Home]

:iagree:

 

" That last sentence was worth reading twice!"

 

:D

[Rhondabee]

The Pearls don't say to spank after you've calmed down. The Pearls use little swats as correction--short and to the point--and then they move on. They don't make a big production of A Spanking.

 

I have swatted a 10month old, for having a temper tantrum. When I would tell her "no" for any reason she would fall down on the floor and whine. I did all the things the "experts" say to do, and it only became worse. Finally, I picked her up and swatted on her well-padded bottom, and she never did it again. I also smacked little hands to teach them not to touch things; if they were old enough to reach for something, they were old enough to learn not to.

 

But, that is what I remember from it as well.

 

That, and anticipating what your child might experience in public and actually "training" for it. That didn't necessarily involve spanking. I remember me being on one side of the room, and my dh on the other, and me calling my dh, and he would run up and say, "Yes, Mommy." And, then I'd call my ds, and dh helped him run up and say, "Yes, Mommy." That sort of thing - but it's been years.

 

I do think my 3yo dd wouldn't be quite so spoiled if I remembered a bit more from my "devouring parenting books" days - :).

[Chris in VA]

Kelli, I, too, was hard on my kids, and I regret so much. My youngest has a different mom than my oldest two.

But God can redeem everything--absolutely everything can be used for his Glory.

Give yourself some slack. You are forgiven. They are God's kids--only on loan, and He knows you will blow it sometimes. He's still in charge.

You've learned some really, really good lessons--and God can heal your child's heart, too.

Just wanted to offer some encouragement--your wisdom, experience and advice have come to mean a lot to me, and I'm sorry to hear your hurt.

[Pamela H in Texas]

although spanking itself has always been used.

'

 

Well, and how and when and how often? There are tons of kids spanked monthly, weekly, even daily or more! I seriously doubt that families that followed the Bible in terms of other family ways found that necessary. The scriptures talking about teaching, guiding, etc all point to doing so mildly, gently, patiently, persistently, consistently, reasonably. There is more than one that talks about not exasperating, frustrating, causing anger in a child. So even if the scriptures in proverbs are saying it is appropriate to "spank," I seriously doubt that it was a main training method at ANY other point in history. It simply doesn't make sense. The Pearls and other such trash as we see so common among parents seem to point to 2 Tim 3:1-5 where it talks about "having no natural affection" and being "fierce" and having "no self control" than the reasonable teaching the Bible sets forth.

 

Now, I don't think every parent that spanks is evil. I don't think they are fulfilling that prophesy. I don't think they are bad parents. I don't even think they are misguided. But if they aren't doing all the other forms of DISCIPLINE (teaching, guiding, correcting, setting kids up for success, being proactive, helping, etc), they are missing out on a lot and doing a disservice to their children.

 

I solely ask people to consider how often they are punishing their children. If they find it is more than monthly, they probably need to beef up their discipline. If their children are truly challenging or difficult, it is even MORE necessary to learn to discipline better.

[ticklbee]

Does anyone subscribe to The Old SchoolHouse mag? Maybe you can help me remember. About a year ago they were going overseas - England maybe? And they were being boycotted or something because of the Pearls. I'm not sure if it's because the Pearls advertised in the mag or because their dd was a columnist. Anyway - it went all the way to the gov't if I'm not mistaken and a lot of their itinerary had to change.

[Tarheel Heather]

Can I just say I have no idea who you guys are talking about. Am I missing something?