Death linked to Pearls' advice--sensitive

[hsgbdmama]

And I know they have used the word "whippings" more than once, and have advocated repeat punishments if they try to run away or continue crying after the initial switching/spanking/whipping.

[slingmamaof4]

Originally Posted by Titus2Momof4

This is so disgusting. Having one in everyroom of your house--easy access for a whipping. And that would be so easy to do when one is angry and hasn't had anytime to calm down. Thus making it much more dangerous.

Another thing that just sends off alarm bells that is mentioned in the article that the Pearls say--not to hit your kids in public or in front of others. If I had to hide the way I discipline then it is clear to me that my disciplining method is NOT okay. That is just scary.

Originally Posted by jadensmom

If a book should be tailored to each family's needs, as opposed to being followed to a T, because following the book to a T is dangerous - then that's not a book that should be advanced in Christian circles.

I know every person takes things from various sorces and meshes them together to make an individual family plan. I certainly do

But I refuse to use as a source any book that I couldn't safely follow exactly as written, even if I choose not to, KWIM?

Ditto!!!!!

No Greater Joy, vol.2, pg 49-51 offers an extremely detailed account of stopping the car every 2-5 min. to spank a whining 2 or 3yr old boy. The reason for this discipline was that "late one night" the child wanted out of his carseat and repeated requests finally melted down into "brokenhearted crying." (MP's words in quotes) Pearl poo-poos the mother for considering that her child might be hungry, tired, or cold.

MP was riding in the car with the father and advised him to COMMAND the boy to stop crying, which the distraught child (MP calls him a brat) did not do. After each spanking, they resumed driving and the child was told to stop crying and spanked when he did not.

"I told the Father to stop the car and without recourse give him three to five licks with a switch.... the child only screamed a louder protest. At my instruction, without further rebuke, the father again stopped the car and spanked the child. Still screaming, we continued for two minutes until the father again commanded the child to be quiet. Again, no response, so the car was again stopped and the child spanked. This was repeated for about twenty miles down a lonesome highway at 11:00 on a winter night."



Titus, you seem to be suggesting that a family could follow the Pearl's teaching without being abusive if they would only use common sense or "tailor" it to fit their needs. I must disagree with you. A family would need to flatly REJECT and diverge from teachings/examples like the one I cited above in order to avoid abuse. (and there are other equally icky examples that could be listed... this one does not stand alone) I firmly believe there is NO WAY a family could follow the spirit or example of the Pearl's advice without becoming abusive. After all, the examples are given for the sole purpose of illustrating the concepts he's trying to teach. If we follow the concepts, but "tailor" them to our own situations, we will simply be creating "tailored" versions of abusing our own kids.

Strong words, I know. My wish is not to offend, but to speak plainly. I admit with horror that I mistreated my child when I was deceived by the advice of MP. No, I didn't smother him with a blanket, or beat him until he limped, or leave bruises on him, but I mistreated him all the same. I refuse to justify what I did by saying that it wasn't nearly as extreme as what someone else did. I refuse to put myself on a higher plane than Lynn Paddock. It is by God's mercy and grace alone that my heart was softened, my eyes were opened, and I was led to a different place.

I see this thread turning into a discussion/debate of the Pearl's methodology. If anyone wishes to continue that, please post in Intense Fellowship. Other comments about the newsstory itself or posting letters you have written is fine.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in their writing worthwhile that can't be learned from reasonable sources.

Thank you!!! Why sift through their garbage for little gems of how to build relationship with your children when you can find it in copious amounts from other sources that don't endorse adversarial styles of parenting??

I sent a letter to the reporter. Just wanted Quiltin'Grandma to know.

[QuiltinGramma]

Great ! Thanks to Lisa for the name of Dobson's book of him telling the dog story. (I really burn when I hear/see stories about animal cruelty. I should have written a loooooong time ago.

[UltraMother]

I honestly don't know how far it would have gone if I had continued with the Pearl teachings and ignored my heart. I saw that the spankings would have to be much harder and much longer if I was going to try to live up to the Pearl ideal. Like someone said in a different thread, you have to keep "upgrading" your spanking implement because the child hardens himself when he sees no other way out. The "little sting" becomes ineffective, and so you have to find something more painful to get him to behave.

[slingmamaof4]

Originally Posted by QuiltinGramma

Great ! Thanks to Lisa for the name of Dobson's book of him telling the dog story. (I really burn when I hear/see stories about animal cruelty. I should have written a loooooong time ago.

Adn what furhter burns me is not only did he beat his dog, but he his using this beating as an analogy for how to treat "strong-willed" children.

[QuiltinGramma]

Yes, I forgot to say that....but I meant too.

Originally Posted by Titus2Momof4

Debra mentioned that

Do you have a reference for this Debra? I know that they are very big on tying strings, so that statement doesn't seem to blend with the tying strings, and to my knowledge Pearl doesn't recommend 'beating' a child.

I'm running into my limit on computer time use...but I'll just back up Debra without references. The Pearls are the master of euphamism--they use words that will not elicit negative responses from their target audience. It is not "desirable" to beat your child or crush his spirit, so they don't use those terms. No, they don't say to beat children, they say to "switch" them. No, they don't say to break a child's spirit, they say to break his will. The Pearls do not always reccommend use of plumbing supply line. I do know that I have read where the Pearls reccommend sizing the switch based on the size of the child, saying that a "branch the size of a tree limb" is appropriate for a teen. I don't know how you can hit a teen repeatedly with something this size and not consider it a "beating"--regardless of how the Pearls try to use "switching" as a euphamism. They also do state repeatedly in their materials that if you aren't getting results--that is, submission of the child's will--from implementing "switching," that you either aren't doing it hard enough or consistently enough--which translates into "beat until the spirit is broken."

Jenn

[TulipMama]

They also do state repeatedly in their materials that if you aren't getting results--that is, submission of the child's will--from implementing "switching," that you either aren't doing it hard enough or consistently enough--which translates into "beat until the spirit is broken."

Yes. And this is where I see many punitive materials, especially but not limited to the Pearls', lead parents to abuse. It is not a lack of "common sense" or abusive tendencies already in the parent. It is the complete confidence the Pearls have and state that if their ideas are not "working" that it is the parents' fault--and to really discipline children Bibically, keep using the rod of spanking harder or more frequently.

I just want to publicly thank Jen for being nice to me

I'm sort of feeling like crap and needed a kind word.

db

[Titus2Momof4]

Another thing that just sends off alarm bells that is mentioned in the article that the Pearls say--not to hit your kids in public or in front of others. If I had to hide the way I discipline then it is clear to me that my disciplining method is NOT okay. That is just scary.

Well, by now you have probably guessed that we are a spanking family. Just FYI, that is why I tend to lay low on this board; I know spanking is against your statement of belief, and that's fine. I can respect that, really I can I'm not a troublemaker LOL But anyway... I just wanted to say something to this comment. *I* have a rule, too, about not spanking in public. But, it is NOT because I am afraid or ashamed or worried or anything. My reason for not spanking in public is because that can be humiliating to a child (even spanking in front of sibs can be humiliating) and my intent when disciplining is not to humiliate. But when you spank in front of others, the focus shifts from what the spanking is about, to humiliation. Thus, I do not spank in public. I am not out to get attention, or humiliate my child ("Oh I'll spank you in front of everyone and let everyone see how bad you are!" ) To me, spankings are very personal and pertain to that particular child, and I will not spank in front of others (besides dh). JMO.

[Titus2Momof4]

I'm running into my limit on computer time use...but I'll just back up Debra without references. The Pearls are the master of euphamism--they use words that will not elicit negative responses from their target audience. It is not "desirable" to beat your child or crush his spirit, so they don't use those terms. No, they don't say to beat children, they say to "switch" them. No, they don't say to break a child's spirit, they say to break his will.

Knitted...just so I understand: Are you saying that IYO there is no difference between beating a child and switching them....and that there is no difference in breaking a child's spirit and breaking his will?

[TulipMama]

Originally Posted by Titus2Momof4

I believe it is necessary to nip this in the bud. I want to remind all involved in this discussion the purpose of the UFP folder:

The "Unprepared for Parenting" folder serves a dual function. The primary one is support and information for those affected by punitive and adversarial methods of child-rearing. The second is helping one another understand/share with churches and friends who are misguided about the Bible's support for parenting as advocated by Ezzo, the Pearls, etc.

In dealing with leaving behind adversarial parenting methods, sometimes we do need to rant. Sometimes there is anger, frustration, sarcasm, mourning, bitterness, discouragement, regret. . . and forgiveness. De-Ezzoing, Re-attaching, Re-evaluating--these are messy things that bring to the surface strong feelings. This folder is a place to express these feelings and the thoughts we have about how God is working in our lives.

Also:

* Need to debate: Go to the Intense Fellowship folder.

* Remember: Many of us have practiced punitive parenting. It's hard to come to terms with mistakes that have harmed our children. Please be gentle and patient with mothers--whether they have AP'd from the start, are just leaving behind punitive parenting, or are still looking into GBD. Many of us are still sensitive.

In case this is not clear to everyone, the UFP folder is NOT a place for a debate on spanking.