Dobson.

[Peridot]

I grew up with parents dedicated to Dobson.

From what I've read, he was not as extreme as either Ezzo OR Pearls, although undisputedly punitive and certainly adversarial.

I am toying with the idea of going back to read his books again- to try to figure out how/where I was most influenced by him.

Are there any others who's primary background is Dobson?
Willing to chat about it? Not sure what I'm trying to figure out-but a lot of the stuff is 'more reasonable' than the others, and I guess that's why it's so hard to flush.

[movinforward]

I would love to chat w/ you about Dobson. I was a big Dobson follower. Read many, many of his books before I had kids. One day, I was at our YMCA and I was in the kid's playroom w/ my then 1 y/o DS. There was this mom there who was amazing! I had never seen any mom interact w/ their kids the way she did. I was so, so impressed. Well, I started talking w/ her and was telling her I was reading Dobson's "Raising Boys" and had read some of his other books. She said, "I would get rid of those Dobson books" (she said it in a nice way - can't remember the exact conversation). I remember leaving there thinking, "wow, she must not be a Christian" Well, I then discovered GCM and started learning more and more about AP. I later ran into the same mom and realized what she was trying to tell me. It is still very hard for me to get out of the Dobson-mindset because that is how I was raised. Anyway, looking forward to this discussion.

[abh5e8]

me, me, me!! my MIL is a HUGE dobon fan...and likes to talk all the time about how revolutioary he was when he was a young mother. i read some of the excerpts on one of the sites listed in the resources section here at gcM, and i have to say, i was appaled at the word choice and underlying attitude towards children. it is very demeaning and degrading....the utmost of disrepect.

ETA: i have also thought about reading some of his work (from the library) so that when the opportunity presents itself, i can have an informed conversation with dMIL about it. also, it may help shed some light onto dh as he was raised this way.

also...i didn't see this in the stickie (but i thought that was where i first found it) anyways...this site has the dobson info i read. i'd love to know what you think about the info on dobson on this sight....especially as a child raised with this mindset.

[hey mommy]

My mom says that she, my dad and Dobson raised me. I started using it with C, but it never felt right. When he was almost 4 I found GCM and I thank God that I did.

[yellowheart]

My liking of Dobson is hit and miss. We actually liked "Bringing Up Boys" and I will be forever grateful for the book b/c it convinced my DH of the value of homeschooling. He has been 100% behind the idea of HS since reading the book. Now we probably won't read "Dare to Discipline" b/c I've heard so many gnarly things about it. We're also not into following any parenting method/guru hook, line, and sinker. I learned my lesson after being exposed to Ezzo.

[ThreeKids]

Dobson goes to a bit of effort to convince people the choices in parenting are ,one, enforcing boundaries punitively or, two, permissive, neglectful parenting that produces kids who have no idea what boundaries are. Once someone accepts that premise, the rest of his mindset follows and it is adversarial from the start. He tells parents kids are born manipulators, but, the truth is, the parents initiated an adversarial relationship first by following his attitude.

There's a lot he says that seems to be throwing a bone to kids' differences and that seems all cozy and nice, but, in the end, every interaction has an implied threat that, if the kid doesn't manage to say things in a respectful way or doesn't obey, there are punitive consequences. A problem is, not all kids are expert placaters, and these kids have to skip a normal developmental phase where they can explore possible reactions to situations, instead having to squelch emotion lest it not come out in the right way, only to eventually bubble over and receive negative consequences, which reinforces the adversarial relationship with the parents.

You hear adults who were Dobsoned complain they had to supress emotion and, Dobson advocates would have counters to this where they say kids can express emotion, just not defiance, but I've already mentioned how, to the kid, the safest thing is to squelch.

The concept he has of defiance seems like such a small part of things the way he explains it, but it takes on a life of its own. It's always the end of the line "solution" to problems, even if spanking for defiance only needs to take the form of implied threats to every interaction to get the results (on the surface) that Dobson tells parent they should get. So, there wouldn't be spanking for misbehavior or rulebreaking, but we all know those things will happen repeatedly and the parent will be left to conclude the root of the problem is defiance.

I've seen my dad interpret dd being in one of those moods where a toddler says no to everything as a defiance problem. My mom says her dog not eating his food is defiance, etc.

The defiance concept ensures that even pleasant interactions still have an implied threat that that kid better do what the parent expects or their actions can be interpreted as defiance. Supposedly, the parents create an environment where the kid would know when to expect a spanking, but, to a kid, that environment is a potential minefield.

---------- Post added at 09:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:17 PM ----------

Originally Posted by hey mommy

My mom says that she, my dad and Dobson raised me. I started using it with C, but it never felt right. When he was almost 4 I found GCM and I thank God that I did.

It hurts that my mom believed what Dobson had to say about why I did things over what I had to say.

[sweetpeasmommy]

bbl

[Peridot]

TwoKids- WOW! I have never been able to think it through this clearly before. you said-

A problem is, not all kids are expert placaters, and these kids have to skip a normal developmental phase where they can explore possible reactions to situations, instead having to squelch emotion lest it not come out in the right way, only to eventually bubble over and receive negative consequences, which reinforces the adversarial relationship with the parents.

And this perfectly describes the problems I had with my parents. I am NOT good at hiding ANYthing. I know, especially with my mother- I dared not disagree w/her in any way, b/c it was a threat to her authority. I never felt that I could truly express my feelings because I was always 'over-reacting'. In truth, I felt that nothing about me was valid, or real. I felt that my mother did not like me, love me, or want me. I began having thoughts of suicide at the age of 12. I thought my mother would be releived. One of the only reasons I didn't do it, was because my father- whom I felt loved me- would have to deal with the mess.

My mother was the disciplinarian.

HeyMommy- I was using it w/Maximus. I hated it. It felt Like I had to take control of every situation, and any time he didn't jump to do as I asked, I had to treaten a spanking- to preserve my authority. When realised that Minimus was approaching the age where I had begun smacking his big brother's fingers, I felt sick, and I dreaded having to draw that line in the sand, and change my relationship with my baby.

more later- teapot/kids

My parents had a lot of Dobson's books, but they were not dedicated to any one "parenting guru" in their philosophy. They were heavily influenced by the teaching at their church, which leans towards grace and New Covenant over legalism, and they were very careful to distinguish between intentional rebellion (what I think some others here are calling defiance) from childish immaturity (which was more often the case). The consequences for rebellion have to be different from those for immaturity, or else the children will just end up being confused and probably hurt. Just look at how God dealt with Israel when she as a nation was immature, or when she was blatantly rejecting Him.

From what I have seen and experienced, he has some useful information. You just have to be discerning when you read his material (as you would with anyone's, really) and separate what works for your family from what doesn't.

[Peridot]

by abh5e8-
also...i didn't see this in the stickie (but i thought that was where i first found it) anyways...this site has the dobson info i read. i'd love to know what you think about the info on dobson on this sight....especially as a child raised with this mindset.

Oh, I have to really bite my tongue on this. As an intelligent thinking person who has actually read the books in question- this site would have made me laugh- not convinced me of anything. In my opinion- the author's style reduces the value of his/her ideas. And quite a bit was taken out of context.

So- not a great site for converting Dobsonites... (*Now I'm thinking I should do my own... )

The real danger in Dobson's conclusions are not his lack of education or authority. The problem is that he is a. a Christian b. a parent and c. a PhD. The fact that he IS these things only reinforces the fact that being any of them is NOT a qualification for excellent parenting.

The FACT is that he makes the case for the adversarial relationship so very well, that its hard to see parenting without the power struggle! That was the real paradigm shift for me. I had never thought that MY attitude toward my child's behavior could make that much of a difference. I thought, and was raised to believe that a child is SET to resist EVERY request a parent or authority figure makes.

Reading the GCM statement of beleifs, especially about believing Biblical parenting includes parental authority, was what won me over. I finally understood that the choices are not between Dictatorship and Free-for-all. The choices are between fearful, unhappy kids and children who are confident enough in their parents' love that they want to obey.

There are a lot of half-truths in Dobson's stuff. a lot of stuff he 'almost' got right. We all know that a half-truth is more dangerous by far than a full-out lie. It is still hard for me to believe when I see how maximus's behavior has changed- that this is because Grace Based parenting really works.

---------- Post added at 03:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 PM ----------

hessedmamma- You make a good point. There was no room for childish immaturity in our house. Dobson does give lip service to the idea of not punishing in those cases. BUT he goes on to assign abilities and understanding to very young children of which they are NOT yet capable. A good example is the episode he uses as an illustration of infants being capable of rebellion. His wife was mopping the floor, and his (?) 8mo daughter kept crawling out onto the wet floor. His wife simply said, 'no Janae', and moved her every time, but allowed her to keep crawling out onto the floor. I understand NOW that this was just setting her up for failure. Even before starting my gentle journey- I knew that this was ridiculous- to expect a child that young to understand.

My point is that almost EVERYTHING ends up getting categorised as 'rebellion'.

[ThreeKids]

Originally Posted by hessedmama

The consequences for rebellion have to be different from those for immaturity, or else the children will just end up being confused and probably hurt.

Dobson would say the exact same thing. The problem is there's not enough emphasis on assigning positive intent. The idea that it's better to assign positive intent and risk being wrong if something really was rebellion than to risk assuming defiance and be wrong is not presented. Defiance is feared to a disproportionate level so that the parent would conclude to assign defiance as a root cause far too often and, yes, it is hurtful to have your actions attributed to a more negative intent.

It's not hurtful at all to have your actions assigned a more positive intent than was intended. If a kid really wanted the parent to know their intent was rebellion, they can always clarify, but Dobson parents would be taught to fear defiance so strongly, they would fear assigning positive intent lest a child get away with defiance.

I would say the consequences for immaturity and defiance should be approached almost the same way, though. Immaturity means your child isn't ready to face the natural consequences of something. Rebellion means your child isn't ready to be trusted with the natural consequences of something.

Too much emphasis on distinguishing rebellion is a major pillar of wrongness in Dobson's methods.

TwoKids - I think you are assuming that I would err on the side of reading defiance into too many situations. I never said anything to support that viewpoint. If anything, what I was trying to say is that we as parents need to be aware of our children's limitations and varying maturity levels and to adjust our expectations of them accordingly.

If my son does something out of childish immaturity, to react as though he was rebelling would be foolish and would not help him. It would be holding him to a higher standard than he is capable of attaining. It would be a learning opportunity, and a chance for him to grow in maturity through consequences. If he was being willfully defiant (as in, really really obvious) then to treat it as immaturity would be failing him. It is possible (and necessary, IMO) to address defiance in a grace-filled way because that is exactly what God has done for us. I am not saying that Dobson's approach is that.

The only way to determine intent and emotional state of mind is through knowing and communicating with your children constantly, not just when incidents happen. And I would venture to say that too little emphasis on knowing your child well enough on a spiritual, emotional and mental level to distinguish when he is being immature and when he is being defiant (and teaching him to do the same for himself) is just as wrong as too much emphasis on distinguishing rebellion.

[Amber]

My big problem with Dobson is how his advice sets families up for adversary. My parents liked Dobson when I was growing up (although my mom no longer does), and my church denomination has a history of being fans of Dobson

At this point in time I can't read his books, because those old thought patterns that I was raised with creep back into my head and I find myself slipping into an adversarial role with my kids

[Peridot]

Originally Posted by Amber

My big problem with Dobson is how his advice sets families up for adversary. My parents liked Dobson when I was growing up (although my mom no longer does), and my church denomination has a history of being fans of Dobson

At this point in time I can't read his books, because those old thought patterns that I was raised with creep back into my head and I find myself slipping into an adversarial role with my kids

My church denomination does too. My mom still loves Dobson. She thinks his advice is the reason her kids turned out so well. In reality, we were all just too darned stubborn to be cowed, and the older we got, the more she loosened up. How I wish she had put time into KNOWING us instead of trying to 'discipline away' each undesireable behavior/attitude.

I am worried that I would not be able to remain at arm's length from the reading either. I am working very hard at assigning positivie intent- it's not yet habit for me.


This is my thing- I FELT that my relationship with Maximus had deteriorated. I knew it- it made me horribly sad- and I was motivated to do something to recover it. My question is- don't other parents experience this?

The situation kept escalating too- and I could see that spanking was creating a contentious dynamic- don't other parents see/sense this?

[ThreeKids]

I stop in my tracks at just the name of the site, stoptherod.net. The rod is biblical, but people's interpretation of it isn't. The rod is authority and I have to problem with that. My problem is people who say it's a paddle or belt, but the name of the site just reinforces the attitude of people who have that view that there really is an us vs. them between punitive parenting and the rest of the world.