Jill Duggar Dillard is pregnant.

[Guest]

If you've ever been in a cult or spiritual/psychological abusive group, you would understand. There is a programming. There are consequences and subtle threats. There are mind games and gaslighting. There is taking minor preferences used to insinuate or outright say that that you are sinning, it's your fault this/that/the other happened, there is shunning, there is dividing you from family and friends. Yes, I lost friends because of ATI... because we didn't take the Advanced Seminar and go all the way with it.

 

I understand what goes on in cults, and it's disturbing.  I just don't get the impression that the Duggar's are cult members.  

[Guest]

Yes.

 

To clarify, again... she said she hits her babies with a plumbing line to blanket train them?  She said it, not the book or someone else? 

[mommaduck]

I understand what goes on in cults, and it's disturbing. I just don't get the impression that the Duggar's are cult members.

ATI is a cult. The Duggars are ATI. As stated before, they are ATI royalty.

[mommaduck]

To clarify, again... she said she hits her babies with a plumbing line to blanket train them? She said it, not the book or someone else?

I believe it was a rubber spatula. I don't remember the conversation in detail.

[gardenmom5]

I'm not a Duggar, obviously, but. I know the way we accounted for this was excellent life insurance.

 

my father died when I was 12.  good insurance, that also paid off the house. my fil died when dh was a teen.  his mother was in a good financial place.  (but clueless in how to handle money.)

 

so, btdt and we will NOT 'rely' upon insurance.

 

my dds have/will have very marketable skills to support a family.  we have good insurance - and I can take over dh's business.

[Joanne]

my father died when I was 12. good insurance, that also paid off the house. my fil died when dh was a teen. his mother was in a good financial place. (but clueless in how to handle money.)

 

so, btdt and we will NOT 'rely' upon insurance.

 

my dds have/will have very marketable skills to support a family. we have good insurance - and I can take over dh's business.

Also, Insurance does not cover divorce, protracted illness or disability. The power differential inherent in SAH mom situations can be bridged, but is is a challenge. Add age gaps, educational gaps and other stuff and it is more complex.

 

About 8 years ago, I realized that not having my own identity professionally, spiritually, and as a whole developed person beyond SAH wife and mother made me not only leads marketable but less happy, less healthy, LESS of a mother.

[Joanne]

I understand what goes on in cults, and it's disturbing. I just don't get the impression that the Duggar's are cult members.

This is a function of not understanding psychological conditioning and control, having a high tolerance for conservative Christianity and the range of culture involved and apparently liking the Duggars. It is important to know that plenty of opinionated, string, willed and smart people get involved in cults. It is a function of the cult, not the character of the people.

[Guest]

I believe it was a rubber spatula. I don't remember the conversation in detail.

Not cool at all.

[Guest]

To play devil's advocate, a college degree, by itself, doesn't necessarily make you marketable either.

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

 

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

[FaithManor]

I cannot share my screen shot. I've been digging this morning and found my print copy. It has the board name of some posters on CMOMB and since some of those moms may be here and I have NO WAY of knowing if they use the same board name on this forum that they used there and do not want to unfairly out someone who may have been part of the discussion but chose not to follow Michelle's advice, I will not post it.  My copy could be pretty painful for those that either participated in discussion but never had anything to do with her teachings, or did become involved in Pearl training methods or ATI or whatever and chose to leave it behind at some point. Here is one a plethora of discussions on the web of that conversation by mothers who were part of the board at the time. This one does not have board names or locations.

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/running-with-a-book-cart/2011/11/are-the-duggars-guilty-of-child-abuse/

 

I found one screen shot in an archive, but it has some identifying information on at least one person who posted on the forum because in a follow up on that thread, still on the page, she used her first name and location telling others that she found a store with a large inventory of the rulers and offered to pick up some for others. Disturbing to me. But, I don't know here who might know that poster since I know that there has been cross over onto this forum - when we had the old board back in the late 90/s early 2000's  there were a lot of CMOMB moms that also posted on the WTM, so will refrain from posting that screen shot.

[ktgrok]

Right, we have life insurance too, more than we need, but that doesn't help if he's incapacitated but not dead. Or if he has some kind of mental breakdown, that leads to him not being able to work, or to leaving us. (I can't imagine him leaving short of a mental breakdown, but those do happen. A friend is dealing with it now.)

[FaithManor]

Incapacitated is the scary one. We did buy a policy that will cover being permanently disabled, but that is way more expensive for what you get and lifetime payout is far lower than the actual life insurance. The kids would get to draw on his SS until they turn 18, but it's not even close between the three of them to what he actually makes. Not in the ballpark. With a 17.5 year old, that means if this happened now, I would not have much income and would be likely taking care of an invalid husband. He would get disability from SS, but again, not in the ballpark of his current salary. Even with the policy, which I would mostly reserve for the kids for college and getting successfully launched into adulthood, I would have to go back to work. Have to...not an option to remain home. Juggling medical care of a disabled individual, getting the boys into DE at the CC over one hour from here in order to finish high school, juggling ds's medical issue right now after the accident, and considering the fact that according to the PT, I may be permanently disabled in that I may never walk without a limp or a cane, and will be unable to stand for long periods or walk decent distances, means limiting my work possibilities.

 

It is crazy how life changes in a flash. Literally a split second.

 

Thankfully, I have supportive family, and because I've kept my teaching license open I can at least sub which would be flexible, or go back to teaching music full time which is not a walking intensive, standing intensive career. I could go back to my music therapy practice as well. So, I really, really worry about women who assume they do not need to have solid, marketable, work skills. You don't know what the future holds. It's not that hard to pick up an EMT license, CNA, ADN, medical transcriptionist, etc. license or whatever. It makes sense to keep a foot in the door of employment in case you need to take care of your family financially.

[Guest]

I cannot share my screen shot. I've been digging this morning and found my print copy. It has the board name of some posters on CMOMB and since some of those moms may be here and I have NO WAY of knowing if they use the same board name on this forum that they used there and do not want to unfairly out someone who may have been part of the discussion but chose not to follow Michelle's advice, I will not post it.  My copy could be pretty painful for those that either participated in discussion but never had anything to do with her teachings, or did become involved in Pearl training methods or ATI or whatever and chose to leave it behind at some point. Here is one a plethora of discussions on the web of that conversation by mothers who were part of the board at the time. This one does not have board names or locations.

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/running-with-a-book-cart/2011/11/are-the-duggars-guilty-of-child-abuse/

 

I found one screen shot in an archive, but it has some identifying information on at least one person who posted on the forum because in a follow up on that thread, still on the page, she used her first name and location telling others that she found a store with a large inventory of the rulers and offered to pick up some for others. Disturbing to me. But, I don't know here who might know that poster since I know that there has been cross over onto this forum - when we had the old board back in the late 90/s early 2000's  there were a lot of CMOMB moms that also posted on the WTM, so will refrain from posting that screen shot.

 

It's okay if you don't want to post it.  I understand that.  

 

I did see the link you posted, last night, when I was googling ATI and cult, etc.  If the Duggars are doing these things, then obviously, that's child abuse.   I just think we need to be careful about accusing people on an online forum when they aren't here to defend themselves.  At this point, it's all still just heresay.  I certainly don't agree with anything I have read about the Pearls and Gothards, last night, and am very surprised (and disappointed) if this is what the Duggars are all about.

[mommaduck]

It's not hearsay for those of us that have heard it directly from them and remember the direct statements from them. Please understand that.

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

Jinnah, I have learned a lot from your reluctance to accept what previous posters have repeatedly said and proved. My own mother was (may still be) a fan until our last conversation when I got so sick of hearing "but they always look so happy, that means they're good parents!"  I finally told her that their cult believes it's a sin to show anything else, and oh yeah, Jim Bob is a producer and their contract gives him extreme control over what TLC is allowed to show! She doesn't have access to the internet since she's in prison for child abuse, so she did not have the information that these ladies have provided; she only had the heavily edited show to go by. Thanks to your involvement in this thread, I can see that I may have been wrong about her changing her mind from just one conversation. (This is NOT intended to be snarky or insulting. I am genuinely grateful.)

[Soror]

It's not hearsay for those of us that have heard it directly from them and remember the direct statements from them. Please understand that.

Yes, I think some must be operating under a different definition. It is perhaps hearsay for us on WTM but at least 2 posters heard it from her mouth, posters that are well-known and established trusted members. It is certainly not hearsay for them. 

[Guest]

It's not hearsay for those of us that have heard it directly from them and remember the direct statements from them. Please understand that.

 

I did mean to add that.  If you directly heard it from them, then no, it's not heresay for you.

[Freckles]

I'm really happy for Derick and Jill. I hope she has a smooth pregnancy, and a healthy baby.

[Guest]

Jinnah, I have learned a lot from your reluctance to accept what previous posters have repeatedly said and proved. My own mother was (may still be) a fan until our last conversation when I got so sick of hearing "but they always look so happy, that means they're good parents!"  I finally told her that their cult believes it's a sin to show anything else, and oh yeah, Jim Bob is a producer and their contract gives him extreme control over what TLC is allowed to show! She doesn't have access to the internet since she's in prison for child abuse, so she did not have the information that these ladies have provided; she only had the heavily edited show to go by. Thanks to your involvement in this thread, I can see that I may have been wrong about her changing her mind from just one conversation. (This is NOT intended to be snarky or insulting. I am genuinely grateful.)

 

Oh, please.   :001_rolleyes:  What have you learned from my reluctance to believe things I hear on the internet about a family that people don't personally know?  That I do not accept everything I hear as truth?  I don't gossip?  I've already said if they do, in fact, do the things mentioned, then yes... that is child abuse and that I am very disappointed.   I am not a fan of the Pearls or Gothards (actually dislike everything I have read about them).  I'm just not accusing people of being child abusers when I have no first-hand knowledge of it.  

[December]

 You don't know what the future holds. It's not that hard to pick up an EMT license, CNA, ADN, medical transcriptionist, etc. license or whatever. It makes sense to keep a foot in the door of employment in case you need to take care of your family financially.

 

Does it really help to get one of these licenses and not use it for 10-20 years though?   It seems like it would a considerable investment of time and money to get one of these licenses and continually renew it when you have no intention of ever working at a job that would need the license except under worst case scenarios and if your life plan is to have a new baby every couple of years, it could be very hard to find the time and childcare to do it.  Since they aren't that hard to get it, it doesn't seem that risky to wait until they're needed to get one.  A CNA, for instance, can be earned in as little as a few weeks.  A few weeks and then you would be in the exact same position as if you had earned it in the beginning of your marriage and then didn't use it for 20 years.

 

I have a Bachelor's degree and haven't worked for for 7 years and sometimes I think if something were to happen to my husband, I would be better off NOT having my BA.  Reason being if I didn't have one, I could go back to college with grants and subsidized loans (that are not available for pursuing undergrad classes when you already have an undergrad degree) and pursue a degree in whatever I thought would best give me the opportunity of financially supporting my family, rather than be stuck with the degree that was based off what my 20 year old self thought would be the most fun and interesting.  Even if my 20 year old self was being more practical and thinking, "What should I study now and pursue a career in so that after 20 years of being a SAHM should something happen to my husband I would have the best chance of being able to re-enter the workforce?" still seems likely I wouldn't have made the "right" choice.  There is no way to predict what the labor market will be like in 20 years.  My husband just recently completely his Bachelor's.  He chose to specialize in a field that was one of the highest in demand at the time, but three years later when he actually graduated the demand had completely slowed and no one in his class had a job offer upon graduation.  Same thing could easily happen with maintaining one of these licenses.  You could maintain it for 20 years, have something happen to your husband, try to find a job with it only to realize that a different license would give you better job opportunities.

[Dory]

It was CMOMB. She advocated using flexible rulers for the blanket training and at one point, women were posting where they could get the rulers and for what price. Women lambed onto that which just hurts my heart all to pieces. I cannot possibly imagine smacking my 6 month old with a ruler. And lest someone come on here and say, "It couldn't hurt that much because it was flexible!", do us all a favor, go buy one of those things - you can usually find them in bright colors at Staples so you can pick a colorful instrument to be beaten with - and have your husband or wife smack you on the legs with that thing. Yes, she advocated hitting below the diaper so there would be nothing to cushion the blow...a teaching of Michael and Debi Pearl.

 

Tomorrow I'll find my link to the screen shot of the CMOMB thread. I hope I still have it. If not, maybe I can find someone else who has a screen shot of it. Disturbing!

 

Those flexible rulers are downright nasty! They seem to give a little more smack and you can 'accidentally' hit harder with them without them breaking. My backside has been on the receiving end of those things. It was like a willow switch only with edges. I can't imagine using that on a baby. It's a little heartbreaking.

I can't really imagine using that on anyone and I am not completely against spanking in general, but that's over the top harsh.

[LisaKinVA]

All this talk about that the kids really can choose is making my head spin a bit.

 

If you haven't been emotionally manipulated, you don't really understand the guilt or the hold that is had over those choices.

 

My relationship with God is a huge part of who I am.  When I was younger, people in authority (parents, pastors, youth leaders) defined what being truly saved meant.  It meant staying at home until you are married (or you are shunned), it meant not working to pay your way through college, but instead going out into the world to preach the gospel (because obviously money was more important than saving others...that was not my family, that was my school), it meant not homeschooling, because children were supposed to be salt and light in the public schools (that was my church), it meant only going to a college that was approved by my father, it meant going to church all. the. time.  It meant dressing a certain way, behaving a certain way, and not having a career outside of the home.  These were all forms of spiritual and emotional manipulation -- and all much, much milder than what happens within ATI families.

 

Their whole spiritual, physical and mental being is wrapped up with a set of rules that makes choosing nearly impossible.  They may feel a certain way (like they want to go to college), and have a talk with their parent who systematically shows them that college would not be honoring God, that relying on college to help them get into a field in which they are interested isn't showing faith that God can direct them into that field in a different way, that their purpose in life is to first honor God.  Even Christian colleges aren't good places, because they have become too secular.  If you are a girl, that conversation also includes not having faith that God will provide for you and any children that come along, that you will be encouraged to usurp the authority of your husband -- and that doesn't honor God, and on, and on.  These "choices" all get discussed in such a way that the ONLY way a young person can choose to be a true Christian is to choose NOT to attend school, to have as many children as God will allow, to marry a person their parents approve, to think ONLY along certain lines (because if they have other thoughts or feelings, they are certainly not honoring God), It takes a LOT to break away from this type of manipulation, because essentially to break away becomes tantamount to not really being saved, losing your friends and family -- all sense of any type of support.

 

It is truly flippant to throw out the "they can always choose to leave" line --- it is no different than someone who has been suffering under abuse and thinking they deserve it.  Thinking this is the best their life will ever be, that leaving will only make things worse.  Of course they can choose differently, but they don't feel there really is any other choice.  It's a psychological trap.

 

Have I heard of people who have used ATI and done things differently, yes I have.  They were the very small exception though, and their kids were all grown more than 15 years ago... Most of those families I know who practice the lifestyle the Duggars exemplify and follow the resources listed on their websites today, however do NOT.  I fail to see how people are making assumptions regarding the beliefs and practices of a family who has laid bare what they believe in print and on television.  Simply because the producers and editors don't show certain things doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

I have very close relatives that have been following ATI for years.  Their oldest was shunned for being rebellious (he didn't agree with his father...he was 17/18 at the time).  The oldest daughter was outwardly pleasant, but there was an undercurrent of anger. She did keep it in check, however -- but one wonders what she was really thinking.  She would not open up about it to anyone, though.  This family is in some sort of transition though...I'm away from them a lot now, so I don't really know everything that's going on.  I just know the girls were wearing pants, and the oldest dd was allowed to cut her hair and wear makeup.  The 2nd dd is also taking college classes at home.  They still have quite a few littles, with a new baby on the way (their oldest is going to be 23)

[Laurie]

 

Michelle Duggar was part of an online mommy group before they signed up for the show in which she advocated blanket training and actually admitted to slapping her babies to train them to not leave the blanket, and endorsed to other mothers there - some of whom were on that board at the time and read her posts and at various times were posters here as well - "Train up a Child" by Michael Pearl in which parents are told to slap their babies when they cry, blanket train which includes hitting the child for leaving the blanket, and beating with flexible plumbing hose. They endorsed the book until they signed on for the show and then took the book off their website but never denounced the teachings. Therefore, if that is what she chose to endorse to young mothers on a public mothering forum, I don't think it's an assumption that her babies were slapped, and her children beaten with plumbing line or at least threatened with it to keep them in line. It would only be logical that she used the methods she endorsed.

 

 

This is so sick. 

 

I have to ask...what is so important about this blanket training?  Do these people have some objection to playpens to set boundaries for their babies without hurting them?  Is this some kind of Pearl teaching that began because they were "ministering" to poor, rural people who wouldn't even be able to afford a playpen?  (I'm not excusing them AT ALL, but just curious...maybe more like dumbfounded...about  how they get modern parents who have access to Babies R Us, etc.  to do the blanket training instead?)    

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

This is so sick. 

 

I have to ask...what is so important about this blanket training?  Do these people have some objection to playpens to set boundaries for their babies without hurting them?  Is this some kind of Pearl teaching that began because they were "ministering" to poor, rural people who wouldn't even be able to afford a playpen?  (I'm not excusing them AT ALL, but just curious...maybe more like dumbfounded...about  how they get modern parents who have access to Babies R Us, etc.  to do the blanket training instead?)    

 

I guess so they don't have to take their playpens everywhere they go?  I'm not sure.  If this is a cult, maybe to teach them to listen as early as possible.  If not a cult, maybe to keep them out of unsafe situations if they don't have a playpen.  Just seems they could do it without rulers and spatulas.

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

This is so sick. 

 

I have to ask...what is so important about this blanket training?  Do these people have some objection to playpens to set boundaries for their babies without hurting them?  Is this some kind of Pearl teaching that began because they were "ministering" to poor, rural people who wouldn't even be able to afford a playpen?  (I'm not excusing them AT ALL, but just curious...maybe more like dumbfounded...about  how they get modern parents who have access to Babies R Us, etc.  to do the blanket training instead?)    

 

Watching an episode I remember Michelle saying that they train babies to stay on a blanket so that later they can make them stay in a chair. She did not on the show say HOW they trained the babies to stay on the blanket.

 

In talking to my mother about this, she mentioned that the cult/church my family belongs to and that she and I were both raised in did blanket training the way Michelle was advising other women to do on that before mentioned forum. My mother was surprised because she thought "our" cult/church was the only one that did that/used that term.

 

Edited to add: for our church/cult it was to keep babies and children quiet and contained during the 2 hour long church services. I remember playing on a small bath mat/carpet sample when I was young, before I was ready to sit in the chair that long.

[idnib]

I cannot share my screen shot. I've been digging this morning and found my print copy. It has the board name of some posters on CMOMB and since some of those moms may be here and I have NO WAY of knowing if they use the same board name on this forum that they used there and do not want to unfairly out someone who may have been part of the discussion but chose not to follow Michelle's advice, I will not post it.  My copy could be pretty painful for those that either participated in discussion but never had anything to do with her teachings, or did become involved in Pearl training methods or ATI or whatever and chose to leave it behind at some point. Here is one a plethora of discussions on the web of that conversation by mothers who were part of the board at the time. This one does not have board names or locations.

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/running-with-a-book-cart/2011/11/are-the-duggars-guilty-of-child-abuse/

 

I found one screen shot in an archive, but it has some identifying information on at least one person who posted on the forum because in a follow up on that thread, still on the page, she used her first name and location telling others that she found a store with a large inventory of the rulers and offered to pick up some for others. Disturbing to me. But, I don't know here who might know that poster since I know that there has been cross over onto this forum - when we had the old board back in the late 90/s early 2000's  there were a lot of CMOMB moms that also posted on the WTM, so will refrain from posting that screen shot.

 

:grouphug: 

 

Please consider digitizing the file and photoshopping out the identifying names. Not for this particular discussion but because it comes up from time to time and could come in handy. At some point...

[FaithManor]

Does it really help to get one of these licenses and not use it for 10-20 years though?   It seems like it would a considerable investment of time and money to get one of these licenses and continually renew it when you have no intention of ever working at a job that would need the license except under worst case scenarios and if your life plan is to have a new baby every couple of years, it could be very hard to find the time and childcare to do it.  Since they aren't that hard to get it, it doesn't seem that risky to wait until they're needed to get one.  A CNA, for instance, can be earned in as little as a few weeks.  A few weeks and then you would be in the exact same position as if you had earned it in the beginning of your marriage and then didn't use it for 20 years.

 

I have a Bachelor's degree and haven't worked for for 7 years and sometimes I think if something were to happen to my husband, I would be better off NOT having my BA.  Reason being if I didn't have one, I could go back to college with grants and subsidized loans (that are not available for pursuing undergrad classes when you already have an undergrad degree) and pursue a degree in whatever I thought would best give me the opportunity of financially supporting my family, rather than be stuck with the degree that was based off what my 20 year old self thought would be the most fun and interesting.  Even if my 20 year old self was being more practical and thinking, "What should I study now and pursue a career in so that after 20 years of being a SAHM should something happen to my husband I would have the best chance of being able to re-enter the workforce?" still seems likely I wouldn't have made the "right" choice.  There is no way to predict what the labor market will be like in 20 years.  My husband just recently completely his Bachelor's.  He chose to specialize in a field that was one of the highest in demand at the time, but three years later when he actually graduated the demand had completely slowed and no one in his class had a job offer upon graduation.  Same thing could easily happen with maintaining one of these licenses.  You could maintain it for 20 years, have something happen to your husband, try to find a job with it only to realize that a different license would give you better job opportunities.

All of these licenses require CEU - continuing education requirements - and some shift work though not a lot in order to maintain the licensing. In my daughter's case as a paramedic, she could easily maintain 4 shifts per month which in the grand scheme of things isn't that much, and CEU coursework much of which can be done either in Saturday seminar, evening lectures, or online. ADN's and CNA's the same. By doing that, a woman can keep her hand in the work world and a certification current, even having personal recommendations from coworkers without sacrificing being a primarily at home mother. Even substitute teaching is very flexible. When I had babies, I only did three days per month for my local school district and mom stayed with the kids. Subbing in half day kindergarten was great because it kept my license current without being gone from my family very much and of course, summers were off unless I wanted to take on summer school for extra pay.

[Guest]

This is so sick. 

 

I have to ask...what is so important about this blanket training?  Do these people have some objection to playpens to set boundaries for their babies without hurting them?  Is this some kind of Pearl teaching that began because they were "ministering" to poor, rural people who wouldn't even be able to afford a playpen?  (I'm not excusing them AT ALL, but just curious...maybe more like dumbfounded...about  how they get modern parents who have access to Babies R Us, etc.  to do the blanket training instead?)

 

  

 

It is because blankets are very portable and easily placed anywhere. If you have small kids, chances are good that you have a blanket with you already. Also, blanket training is a part of the bigger philosophy of training obedience. "train them to obey, instantly and with a smile, and you don't have to teach them anything else," as a famous advocate of it said.

 

I guess so they don't have to take their playpens everywhere they go?  I'm not sure.  If this is a cult, maybe to teach them to listen as early as possible.  If not a cult, maybe to keep them out of unsafe situations if they don't have a playpen.  Just seems they could do it without rulers and spatulas.

FWIW, I do have a friend who used the idea behind blanket training, but used re-direction instead of corporal correction. She had some cue word, like, "blanket time!" And just kept moving baby back onto the blanket and repeating the cue. It worked. However, she had three kids, not twenty, so...one's mileage may vary.

 

Jinnah, I just wanted to say that, though I feel somewhat frustrated by your reluctance to believe these things could be true of the Duggars, I DO ADMIRE your determination to find the "smoking gun." It takes character to keep applying the acid test, rather than run with a rumor unsubstantiated. I have paid attention to the Duggars since long before they were on TLC and I have had to draw the conclusion that there's a whole lot of smoke here, so i conclude fire is likely.

 

I also remember, very vaguely, a conversation on the QF e-mail loop in which participants were sharing where they buy plumbing supply line for use as a "rod." So I can relate to the feeling of, "WHAT? These women are trading tips on hitting their babies using tubing that won't leave bruises?!?!" It wasn't long after that I decided there were too many weirdos in that group and this was not the community for me.

[Mrs Mungo]

 

It is truly flippant to throw out the "they can always choose to leave" line --- it is no different than someone who has been suffering under abuse and thinking they deserve it.  Thinking this is the best their life will ever be, that leaving will only make things worse.  Of course they can choose differently, but they don't feel there really is any other choice.  It's a psychological trap.

 

 

And it is important to remember, there are women here who are suffering through abuse and/or abusive control. It's important to recognize the mechanics that cause them to stay in those situations instead of "simply" leaving. 

[busymama7]

I am really disappointed and wish I hadn't read this thread :(

 

I knew about the blanket training thing but I also use blanket time to help control the chaos while we homeschool in much the same way the previous poster described her friend. I don't hit or swat. Just put them back and be very very consistent. It does work but takes a long time. But it's worth it to me though. One reason I don't use a play pen is I have more kids then space for playpens :/. We can pull out a couple blankets, a few toy buckets and have the toddlers and preschoolers contained for a time to do read alouds etc. anyways I only mention this because i have always maintained in my little head that Michelle must be training them the way I do because she seems too calm and sweet to hit a baby. :(. And now I'm just sad.

[Mrs Mungo]

I am really disappointed and wish I hadn't read this thread :(

 

I knew about the blanket training thing but I also use blanket time to help control the chaos while we homeschool in much the same way the previous poster described her friend. I don't hit or swat. Just put them back and be very very consistent. It does work but takes a long time. But it's worth it to me though. One reason I don't use a play pen is I have more kids then space for playpens :/. We can pull out a couple blankets, a few toy buckets and have the toddlers and preschoolers contained for a time to do read alouds etc. anyways I only mention this because i have always maintained in my little head that Michelle must be training them the way I do because she seems too calm and sweet to hit a baby. :(. And now I'm just sad.

 

 

Putting your baby on a blanket to play and consistently returning them isn't at all the same at "blanket training" as described by the Pearls and the like. 

 

Lots of parents use blanket training and even swats with various implements without going into child abuse territory. 

 

Sorry, I think swatting a BABY who is only crawling with *any* implement is absolutely abusive. 

[Caroline]

 

 

 

Sorry, I think swatting a BABY who is only crawling with *any* implement is absolutely abusive.

I'm with Mrs Mungo on this one.

[*Lulu*]

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

 

Of course, they're probably just abusive monsters.

I cannot for the life of me think of a situation where a child who is still CRAWLING needs be hit with anything, hand or implement.

 

Of course I'm probably just the parent of poorly behaved children.

[Mrs Mungo]

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

I never had any issue redirecting my babies instead of hitting them.

 

 

Of course, they're probably just abusive monsters.

 

You realize that pretty much NO abusive parent really believes that that they are a monster? No man who abuses his wife believes that he is a monster. You realize that your instant reversion to complete snark, followed by cries of persecution is why so many people here think you are a troll?

[NCMom]

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

 

Of course, they're probably just abusive monsters.

 

It's not what they are hitting the baby with, it's the fact that they are hitting a baby, let alone a baby of that age, at all.

 

Which you no doubt already realize.

 

Georgia

[zoobie]

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

 

Of course, they're probably just abusive monsters.

That is the most bizarre reasoning. If my husband whacked me with a plumbing line or plastic ruler, I wouldn't parse out the difference, and I'm an adult. Plus, the whole idea behind it is blind obedience. Do they want the kids to obey the ruler? No. That's crap justification right there.

[Joanne]

Putting your baby on a blanket to play and consistently returning them isn't at all the same at "blanket training" as described by the Pearls and the like.

 

 

Sorry, I think swatting a BABY who is only crawling with *any* implement is absolutely abusive.

And training them to "stay" developmentally inappropriate.

[idnib]

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

 

Wow, how do they bathe them, change diapers, feed them, dress them, etc?

 

Yes, I'm being facetious, because...seriously? A person's going to hit a baby with an implement so the baby likes their hands? Or so they can wave the implement around to scare the baby?

 

It's a baby.

[mommaduck]

AM, it is if it's done to an infant. A BABY.

[MFG]

And training them to "stay" developmentally inappropriate.

I find that aspect more troubling than the use of mild physical deterrence.

[Guest]

Dr Sears specifically cautions against use of wooden spoons (thats the duggar too of choice according to the book I read iirc or maybe it was shown in her purse on the tv show) because it is akin to a club.

 

Dr Spock said if you must spank your child let it be with your hand because at least you feel what you are doing.

 

Using a spatula, plumber tube, a spoon or any other implement is abusive.

 

I don't advocate spanking at all, but I agree with the bolded. In a parental temper tantrum, at least a swat with the hand will hurt you, which is a built-in measure of instant feedback on how hard you're hitting. Weapons do not permit the same feedback. The more distant the weapon, the truer this is.

 

My mother used a ping pong paddle, a paddle-ball paddle, or a wooden spoon. She actually broke a spoon in half on my sister once. :( i don't think any level of "obedience" would be worth that.

[Dory]

I don't advocate spanking at all, but I agree with the bolded. In a parental temper tantrum, at least a swat with the hand will hurt you, which is a built-in measure of instant feedback on how hard you're hitting. Weapons do not permit the same feedback. The more distant the weapon, the truer this is.

 

My mother used a ping pong paddle, a paddle-ball paddle, or a wooden spoon. She actually broke a spoon in half on my sister once. :( i don't think any level of "obedience" would be worth that.

 

My mom broke a few wooden spoons. She moved to those plastic stir spoons after that because they don't break so easily. It was either that, or those flexible rulers, or a switch, or whatever she could get her hands on at the time. After all that, I would never use an object to discipline my child. I am not completely against spanking in some situations, but I would want to be able to feel how hard I'm connecting with my child. Those bendable plastic things seem to increase the force of the hit a little bit like a whip.

[Mrs Mungo]

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

[Lang Syne Boardie]

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

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

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

Hitting a baby with an object is abuse.

 

  

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

100%.

[Mrs Mungo]

Hitting a baby with an object is abuse.

 

And frankly? The biggest issue for me is the issue of escalation. It was *easy* to never hit a baby. Not hitting a smart mouthed big kid who did something they knew darn well was wrong and is screaming at you? MUCH more difficult. Anyone who doesn't have the self control not to hit a baby shouldn't be a parent at all. It doesn't get easier.

[Guest]

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

 

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

 

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

Your opinion differs from mine.

 

When my kids were babies, one thing I absolutely did not want to deter was their curiosity, their natural desire to explore and understand their world. I barely even used playpens and seats. I often placed them on a blanket, spread all manner of interesting things around them, and let them discover. I heard of blanket training early on, but, with or without corporal corrections,

I was not remotely interested in doing this, because I did not want to thwart my children from attempting to discover. I did not require that they sit in one spot and suck on the same dumb toy for two hours!

 

IMO, the more parents get a "pass" on doing hurtful things to try and make their kids compliant and obedient, the less good mothers and fathers will seek kind, relational ways of shaping behavior.

 

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

 

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

[Guest submarines]

I am really disappointed and wish I hadn't read this thread :(

 

I knew about the blanket training thing but I also use blanket time to help control the chaos while we homeschool in much the same way the previous poster described her friend. I don't hit or swat. Just put them back and be very very consistent. It does work but takes a long time. But it's worth it to me though. One reason I don't use a play pen is I have more kids then space for playpens :/. We can pull out a couple blankets, a few toy buckets and have the toddlers and preschoolers contained for a time to do read alouds etc. anyways I only mention this because i have always maintained in my little head that Michelle must be training them the way I do because she seems too calm and sweet to hit a baby. :(. And now I'm just sad.

 

If it were simply to contain a baby on a blanket with a toy bucket, why would one even need any kind of "training?"

 

It is not like I've never put my babies on a blanket with their toys. If they were not hungry, not wet, not overly tired, they would just enjoy their toys. This wasn't a training, that was just play time. If they crawled off, I'd redirect them and put them back, maybe with some new toys or a snack (for an older baby). If they became upset, a change of activity is in order. And in most environments a baby crawling 2 feet off the blanket is not a problem.

 

The emphasis on blanket training seems to carry a deep philosophical conviction that a baby needs to obey. Which is developmentally inappropriate, to say the least.

 

[gardenmom5]

All of these licenses require CEU - continuing education requirements - and some shift work though not a lot in order to maintain the licensing. In my daughter's case as a paramedic, she could easily maintain 4 shifts per month which in the grand scheme of things isn't that much, and CEU coursework much of which can be done either in Saturday seminar, evening lectures, or online. ADN's and CNA's the same. By doing that, a woman can keep her hand in the work world and a certification current, even having personal recommendations from coworkers without sacrificing being a primarily at home mother. Even substitute teaching is very flexible. When I had babies, I only did three days per month for my local school district and mom stayed with the kids. Subbing in half day kindergarten was great because it kept my license current without being gone from my family very much and of course, summers were off unless I wanted to take on summer school for extra pay.

 

I know nurses that will work a couple shifts a MONTH and maintain their license.  a full time bsn nurse around here can support a family.  (and one who took seven months for maternity leave before she went back for a couple shifts a month.)

 

[Aelwydd]

And frankly? The biggest issue for me is the issue of escalation. It was *easy* to never hit a baby. Not hitting a smart mouthed big kid who did something they knew darn well was wrong and is screaming at you? MUCH more difficult. Anyone who doesn't have the self control not to hit a baby shouldn't be a parent at all. It doesn't get easier.

And also, what about a baby that has special needs or has health issues or is colicky? Or worse, one who has sensory issues? People who aren't patient with a neurotypical or laid back infant are unlikely to find stores of forbearance within to cope with those types of challenges. I shudder just contemplating it.

[Guest]

That's how it was explained to me. But there was more to it than that. And most moms I know who advocate that sort of discipline don't use it on small infants. It tends to be picking them up and redirecting them back to an appropriate spot or activity. Swats and such are saved for older children who are intentionally disobeying in an area they have just been verbally corrected in. 14-18 months seems more common.

 

I've never read anything by the Pearls or Gothard, so this is my assessment of real life families who have. They are good parents who love their kids, and their older and adult children are healthy and thriving. Likening this automatically to abuse is like saying all children who are latchkey kids are neglected, or all kids who were ever spanked are abused. While abuse definitely can happen in those subcategories, I think calling it default or typical is just not nuanced enough for reality.

 

This is an area I believe good and loving parents can feel differently, and should be able to do so without criticism that they haven't warranted. That's all.

Are you aware that you are making the same arguments that were not very long ago made by men who believed they had the right to physically discipline their wives? Very same argument. "Just a different way of going about nurturing an obedient helpmeet. Plus, look at Jane. Doesn't she seem happy? If she is being abused, she can just leave."