or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › To Train Up a Child?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

To Train Up a Child? - Page 4

post #61 of 100
Thread Starter 
I talked to a leader today, I feel much better. I think a great way to handle this in the future, is like another poster mentioned.....having discussion on parenting styles etc. at the next meeting. Rather than calling this mama out on it. As far as befriending this mama.....i will tell her that this style of parenting will not work for my family. That i will not be needing the book from her.
The more that i think about it...our situation here at my house is really not that bad. I think i tend to blow it out of proportion if im down or if my hubby is making me crazy for what ever reasons men do sometimes. But i like our style of parenting...it's working.
post #62 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by momma_unlimited View Post
Out of curiosity, why would this be a matter to bring to LLL leader attention?

If this conversation is happening between mommas on the side, and not officially promoted by the leaders, isn't it... just that? A side conversation of a child-raising philosophy you think sucks?

I guess I can't imagine, from the meetings I've been to, leaders telling the mommas they can't discuss certain topics amongst themselves...???

I certainly share the disgust of others here about treating children like or worse than animals, and having read the book I pity those who cannot see the load of crap much of it is... yet, people are free...
The thing is, this book definitely does NOT agree with LLL philosophy. LLL philosphy is much more GD.

Quote:
Originally Posted by momma_unlimited View Post
I guess my meetings were way laid back. LOTS of conversation afterwards, and snacks... although it would have been rude for people to have side discussions DURING the meeting, I can see leaders addressing that.



I can see your points, I guess I just think about the other side of it- what if I had been at a meeting and offered to let a pregnant momma borrow "Unassisted Childbirth" or something, and since many people think that's on the other end of the extreme scale, they then talked to the leaders about me, prepared meetings about "safe childbirth", asked mothers not to discuss birth without a trained assistant...
But a birth book like that would not directly contradict LLL philosophy. LLL says the best start to BF is when mothers are alert and fully participating in childbirth (or something like that, I can't remember exactly). So, even though some might find it extreme, I don't think it would be much of an issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mamato3wild ponnie View Post
I talked to a leader today, I feel much better. I think a great way to handle this in the future, is like another poster mentioned.....having discussion on parenting styles etc. at the next meeting. Rather than calling this mama out on it. As far as befriending this mama.....i will tell her that this style of parenting will not work for my family. That i will not be needing the book from her.
The more that i think about it...our situation here at my house is really not that bad. I think i tend to blow it out of proportion if im down or if my hubby is making me crazy for what ever reasons men do sometimes. But i like our style of parenting...it's working.
I'm glad you talked to her. I could totally see a new mom thinking that LLL recommends that book if that lady is so forward about offering it.
post #63 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipper26 View Post
I found these examples from a review on Amazon:


1) The Pearls recommend whipping infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They whip their own 4 month old (p.9). They recommend whipping the bare skin of "every child" (p.2) for "Christians and non-Christians" (p.5) and for "every transgression" (p.1). Parents who don't whip their babies into complete submission are portrayed as indifferemt, lazy, careless and neglectful (p.19) and are "creating a Nazi" (p.45).

2) On p.60 they recommend whipping babies who cannot sleep and are crying, and to never allow them "to get up." On p.61 they recommend whipping a 12 month old girl for crying. On p.79 they recommend whipping a 7 month old for screaming.

3) On p.65 co-author Debi Pearl whips the bare leg of a 15 month old she is babysitting, 10 separate times, for not playing with something she tells him to play with. On p.56 Debi Pearl hits a 2 your old so hard "a karate chop like wheeze came from somewhere deep inside" him.

4) On p.59 they recommend whipping a 3 year old until he is "totally broken."

5) On p.44 they say not to let the child's crying while being hit to "cause you to lighten up on the intensity or duration of the spanking."

6) On p.55 the Pearls say a mother should hit her child if he cries for her.

7) On p.80 they recommend giving a child having a tantrum "a swift *forceful* spanking." On the same page they say to whip small children on their bare skin until they stop screaming. "Don't be bullied. Give him more of the same." They say to continue whipping until their crying turns into a "wounded, submissive whimper."

8) On p.46 the Pearls say that if a child does obey before being whipped, whip them anyway. And "if you have to sit on him to spank him,then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher." "Defeat him totally."

9) On p.47 they recommend their various whips, including "a belt or larger tree branch" to hit children.

10) The Pearls also recommend ignoring an infant's bumped head when he falls to the floor, and ignoring skinned knees (p.86). They also say "if your child is roughed-up by peers, rejoice." (p.81)

11) They recommend pulling a nursing infant's hair (p.7), tripping a non-swimming toddler so she falls into deep water (p.67) and to make children go hungry if they don't "like what is on the table" (p.103). Also on p.103 they say that if children lose their shoes, "let them go without until they (the children) can make the money to buy more."


So sick. These people are evil.
...I just don't get it. How the heck could these people write such things (in the US) without getting their sick abusive butts hauled off to jail?
post #64 of 100
Parents who follow them have had legal problems (there was one case where a little boy died.) Here's one article - http://www.newsobserver.com/news/cri...y/1077663.html

Unfortunately it seems to be particularly popular in the South, where spanking is much more readily accepted culturally.
post #65 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamaUK View Post
could you talk a bit more about this? I'm really interested , it's so strong in society that children must do as they told and if they do not obey they are naughty. I would like to explore other options other than making my children 'obey'. I often say to my children when I am very tired and exhausted 'you're just not doing as you are told/asked' and feel bad afterwards.

I'm not the poster who wrote this, but... Come visit the Gentle Discipline forum! There are lots of good resources there on this idea (btw- GD doesn't mean "no D"... It means disciplining with respect and the idea of being a teacher and a guide instead of a dictator).

You are so right- the idea we have for kids is "do as I say". Teaching a child to discern for themselves what is right is MUCH harder. It is messy, it takes allowing them to make "poor" choices to experience the consequences (within reason, obviously nothing truly dangerous). It takes patience, lots of explaining and a measure of flexibility. All this is labor intensive and takes a leap of faith that eventually the lessons will be learned (and also a tough skin, as some people feel they will be harshly judged for their child's "mistakes" in this learning process). It us much "easier" if your child just "does what you say", but... it is superficial. You "look good" as a parent of a "well behaved child", your child just goes along doing what she is told, but how does this help her become a better, stronger, more understanding person? If we go along by the idea that our children are, at heart, good people and want to do the right thing, then enabling them to do it by arranging situations where it is easy for them to do the right thing and when choices in behavior need to be made, we help them see the choices, then, they will do their best.

If you want blind followers, then the Pearls are extreme, but the "right" idea. Punishment or pain for bad, maybe treats for good. But if you want leaders, independent thinkers and children who grow up feeling that they were treated as sentient people and not pets, then it is a long, messy and very difficult process of teaching a little person of empathy, social expectations, responsibility, and self-awareness. "Discipline" becomes the partnership that it inherently is. Parents lead, describe, keep safe, set boundaries and choose environments. Kids do the best they can, learn, discuss, and give back.
post #66 of 100
My sister tried to get me to read this book. It was before she had children and thought she knew everything. I skimmed through the copy she had and from what I remember it advocates spanking even small babies!!! I remember reading something about swatting a 6 month old with a switch on the legs if they squirm during a diaper change. I was like "Are you serious!". Luckily my sister got her head screwed on a little better before her babes were born. Although she does believe in being very strict with children. She thinks I let my kids run wild LOL.
post #67 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipper26 View Post
I found these examples from a review on Amazon:


1) The Pearls recommend whipping infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They whip their own 4 month old (p.9). They recommend whipping the bare skin of "every child" (p.2) for "Christians and non-Christians" (p.5) and for "every transgression" (p.1). Parents who don't whip their babies into complete submission are portrayed as indifferemt, lazy, careless and neglectful (p.19) and are "creating a Nazi" (p.45).

2) On p.60 they recommend whipping babies who cannot sleep and are crying, and to never allow them "to get up." On p.61 they recommend whipping a 12 month old girl for crying. On p.79 they recommend whipping a 7 month old for screaming.

3) On p.65 co-author Debi Pearl whips the bare leg of a 15 month old she is babysitting, 10 separate times, for not playing with something she tells him to play with. On p.56 Debi Pearl hits a 2 your old so hard "a karate chop like wheeze came from somewhere deep inside" him.

4) On p.59 they recommend whipping a 3 year old until he is "totally broken."

5) On p.44 they say not to let the child's crying while being hit to "cause you to lighten up on the intensity or duration of the spanking."

6) On p.55 the Pearls say a mother should hit her child if he cries for her.

7) On p.80 they recommend giving a child having a tantrum "a swift *forceful* spanking." On the same page they say to whip small children on their bare skin until they stop screaming. "Don't be bullied. Give him more of the same." They say to continue whipping until their crying turns into a "wounded, submissive whimper."

8) On p.46 the Pearls say that if a child does obey before being whipped, whip them anyway. And "if you have to sit on him to spank him,then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher." "Defeat him totally."

9) On p.47 they recommend their various whips, including "a belt or larger tree branch" to hit children.

10) The Pearls also recommend ignoring an infant's bumped head when he falls to the floor, and ignoring skinned knees (p.86). They also say "if your child is roughed-up by peers, rejoice." (p.81)

11) They recommend pulling a nursing infant's hair (p.7), tripping a non-swimming toddler so she falls into deep water (p.67) and to make children go hungry if they don't "like what is on the table" (p.103). Also on p.103 they say that if children lose their shoes, "let them go without until they (the children) can make the money to buy more."


So sick. These people are evil.
They're 1000% evil and should rot in jail.
post #68 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deer Hunter View Post
I agree with you. They are really messed up.

Oh, I hope that this is not the enitre review word for word from the site, as it would actually violate MDC's copyright terms. No, i"m not trying to police anyone, but I just learned this this morning because I did a play by play on the book and quoted a whole lot of text from it. I'm glad the mod brought the copyright rule to my attention, so I could be mindful of it the next time. What the rule is is that you can only quote up to one hundred words of another's texxt, and still, credit has to be given to the source from which you got it. If you have more to prove than the one hundred words you are allowed to quote, then you can paraphrase. Even though you paraphrase, you still need to state where you got the information.

I hope this helps. Don't feel bad. I did not fully understand until a mod brought it to my attention. I thought that I could quote as much as I wanted to prove my point, so long as I gave credit to the original author, but I was wrong. Blessings.
It's not the whole review, just the quotes they used with the page numbers. It is a good portion of it, though. Oops! I didn't know and won't do it again, but the review can be found on the website for Amazon.
post #69 of 100
Wow. I never knew about any of this. How horrifying.
post #70 of 100
First, I have to say, ***I don't agree with hitting a child****

But...

I just read several articles on their website and honestly, they don't sound as horrific as many people make them out to be. They said they never hit any of their children under the age of 1 and afterwards use a light 'swat' in order to not use their hands because they are aware of the potential for severe damage from hand-slapping (so in their intention, its a gentler way instead of slapping). They also support co-sleeping and no-schooling. Alot of their advice is quite on board with MDC.

I think its unfortunate the severe angle they took on using 'training' in certain books and articles, and its even more unfortunate that there are many people out there who blindly try to folow their advice and cause harm (or death) to a child.

Again, I'm not supporting their viewpoints on 'training' via physical pain...just figured I'd throw out some other information I learned today about them. Maybe they realized the potential for people abusing their children and they backed down on the way they advise swatting little ones...it kind of seems like the case to me, given the articles I just read through. Maybe they'll revise their book to be the same....I pray for that to happen so others don't misuse/use the advice.

OK...fire away!
post #71 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by SandraS View Post
I had to read that twice. SHOCKED.
Me too. My 6mo drives me crazy during diaper changes right now, but spanking him? NEVER.
post #72 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by PPK View Post
First, I have to say, ***I don't agree with hitting a child****

But...

I just read several articles on their website and honestly, they don't sound as horrific as many people make them out to be. They said they never hit any of their children under the age of 1 and afterwards use a light 'swat' in order to not use their hands because they are aware of the potential for severe damage from hand-slapping (so in their intention, its a gentler way instead of slapping). They also support co-sleeping and no-schooling. Alot of their advice is quite on board with MDC.

I think its unfortunate the severe angle they took on using 'training' in certain books and articles, and its even more unfortunate that there are many people out there who blindly try to folow their advice and cause harm (or death) to a child.

Again, I'm not supporting their viewpoints on 'training' via physical pain...just figured I'd throw out some other information I learned today about them. Maybe they realized the potential for people abusing their children and they backed down on the way they advise swatting little ones...it kind of seems like the case to me, given the articles I just read through. Maybe they'll revise their book to be the same....I pray for that to happen so others don't misuse/use the advice.

OK...fire away!
Ummm...... maybe you should read their books and not the website. Not flaming at all, but I did read their current book and yes they support co-sleeping, un-schooling and even breastfeeding, BUT the theme of their books center around physical punishment and control. And in the course of their homeschooling advice, they push gender stereotypes and urge parents to train their girls to be submissive in every way and their boys to be controlling dictators. There is also a portion of the book where they advise that if you are to leave a younger child in the care of an older child, the older child should be able to "whip" the younger. This is a minor example of what they advocate. So, yes they do teach some things MDC approvable, but in their case, I think the bad outweighs the good, you know?
post #73 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixMommaToTwo View Post
Ummm...... maybe you should read their books and not the website. Not flaming at all, but I did read their current book and yes they support co-sleeping, un-schooling and even breastfeeding, BUT the theme of their books center around physical punishment and control. And in the course of their homeschooling advice, they push gender stereotypes and urge parents to train their girls to be submissive in every way and their boys to be controlling dictators. There is also a portion of the book where they advise that if you are to leave a younger child in the care of an older child, the older child should be able to "whip" the younger. This is a minor example of what they advocate. So, yes they do teach some things MDC approvable, but in their case, I think the bad outweighs the good, you know?
Definitely outweighs the good. I don't care if a parent breastfeeds, cosleeps, and home/unschools. If they beat their children and treat them like objects to be controlled, they are abusers.

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Pearl's more recent writings have been toned down. It's an "Ezzo" effect...when more people realize how horrid their "advice" is, they tone it down and try to make it more palatable to the mainstream in order to keep selling books and gaining followers.
post #74 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by PPK View Post
First, I have to say, ***I don't agree with hitting a child****

But...

I just read several articles on their website and honestly, they don't sound as horrific as many people make them out to be. They said they never hit any of their children under the age of 1 and afterwards use a light 'swat' in order to not use their hands because they are aware of the potential for severe damage from hand-slapping (so in their intention, its a gentler way instead of slapping). They also support co-sleeping and no-schooling. Alot of their advice is quite on board with MDC.

I think its unfortunate the severe angle they took on using 'training' in certain books and articles, and its even more unfortunate that there are many people out there who blindly try to folow their advice and cause harm (or death) to a child.

Again, I'm not supporting their viewpoints on 'training' via physical pain...just figured I'd throw out some other information I learned today about them. Maybe they realized the potential for people abusing their children and they backed down on the way they advise swatting little ones...it kind of seems like the case to me, given the articles I just read through. Maybe they'll revise their book to be the same....I pray for that to happen so others don't misuse/use the advice.

OK...fire away!
Actually they do advocate hitting children under age one. They advocate hitting the newborns, as they feel that training should start early. Their argument for training a child long before it can understand and reason is that a dog can be trained to obey commands without fail. so, babies are dogs to them.

They did hit one of their children under age one, and they admitted to it in their book on page nine. It was their four month old daughter. They hit her with a twelve inch switch that came from a willow tree on the back of her legs because she was trying to climb the stairs.
post #75 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaJunkie View Post
Definitely outweighs the good. I don't care if a parent breastfeeds, cosleeps, and home/unschools. If they beat their children and treat them like objects to be controlled, they are abusers.

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Pearl's more recent writings have been toned down. It's an "Ezzo" effect...when more people realize how horrid their "advice" is, they tone it down and try to make it more palatable to the mainstream in order to keep selling books and gaining followers.


You are very right. Spock and Ferber also did the same. When the "experts" are exposed, they try to make themselves look good by changing what they say. I don't care if they do this because they show you their true colors the first time around. They have no backbone, as they will do what it takes just to get a buck and exploit tired and searching parents. I have no respect for "experts" who just change their material just to be acceptable all because theyy were exposed as sedistic. I'll follow the good ones, thank you, such as Doctor Sears, because he has it right from the beginning.
post #76 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticmomma View Post
it's the pearls. they advocate spanking 6 mos old that roll over during diaper changes.
What.The. ??

I have heard bad things about this book... but didn't know much about the specific details.
I am at a loss for words... *blink*
post #77 of 100
Agreed that the bad outweighs the good, some of thier advice is unforgivable IMO (accepting back a husband who molests your child, for example..), so I guess its hard for me to wrap my head around so much contradicting advice from them, and that unfortunatley makes me wary of accepting any of it, no matter how good it may be (some blogs on their site were actually quite beautiful and centered on the whole 'God is Love' theme..).

Although I'm not Christian or of a religion, I read their marriage book and its not about being a doormat. She advocates being a strong, hardworking and graceful woman (for the most part..of course there are some points I'm not 100% on, again, accepting an abusive hubby who's 'repented').

She is of the belief that surrender of your ego for the ability to love and be a help to another is a way to experience divine love and beauty in your marriage. This theory/practice can be seen in many relious and spiritual communities, often times maybe not as emphasized on your husband, but I do value it as a way to personal liberation from your ego's negativity, in essence, allowing the Infinite (aka, God, Universal Conciousness, whatever your word is..) to BE in your life.

But, yeah, I'm so sorry that their child advice is the way it is regarding the physical discipline (abuse).

PS, I don't have any intention of defending them, just wanted to throw in my .2 since I spent alot of time this summer thinking about them and their marriage lifestyle advice.
post #78 of 100
People claim to abuse others in the name of love all the time. And it certainly is possible to hold conflicting ideals and have distorted ways of enacting those ideals. There are LOTS of people and groups that discuss letting go of the ego to reach a high level of connection (Buddhists, for example) that don't in any way advocate abuse. But the Pearl's "ways" are wrong. Pure and simple. If you have enough chutzpah and mishegas (loosely translated as "guts and craziness") to read them and try to take only "good" ideas and leave the "bad"... Well, good luck. It will be a very hard task.

Just having an idea of positive thinking, love and G-d doesn't make them right.

I mean, Hitler was an artist and loved animals. Stalin spent time in a seminary to become a priest. I think THEIR views on how we should treat eachother and how we go about making a better world show that you must judge on what you see happening- people's actions, not someone elses ideal.

And, just for the record, MDC'ers don't have a monopoly on the ideas of co-sleeping, bf or homeschooling. There are plenty of nuts that do these things for other reasons that are not at all the same that we do them and the results are very,very different.
post #79 of 100
On a slightly different note, how does one go about effecting change in a situation like this? I guess what I've been thinking about alot is whether or not it is possible to not write off people completely, but instead try to gain a better understanding of why they do what they do, in order to facilitate change for the better.

I don't know if that makes sense, but I hope the basic jist comes across. I wrote them off comletely a few months back when I heard bits and peices of what they taught, but now am interested in the pattern of thought that produces certain lifestyles. Is it possible for people of different practices to approach another out of concern in a gentle manner?

And yes, I feel able to discern good information from what isn't ok in my life without subscribing to everything a group advocates.
post #80 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by momma_unlimited View Post
This book was given to me as a new mother.

It made the first two years of DS1's life pretty awful, not because I followed it to a T, but because I had the seed planted in my mind that if my child doesn't obey, I'm a bad mother..
Me too. The most shameful thing I ever did as a parent was read this book with an open mind. Thankfully my gut told me it was wrong from the very beginning, but it still made things very difficult for the first year or so. These people are dangerous. They make my stomach churn with anger and sadness.

WRT these books (Ezzo, Pearl) using the Bible as their basis, it is typical. This is how I got introducted to this book in the first place (fundamentalist church that I ran far away from years ago). It is not surprising that both Ezzo and Pearl are conservative men who are undoubtedly very afraid of losing control of their "world". Many people who are insecure and afraid use the Bible as means to try to convey an agenda or simply to make themselves feel important.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › To Train Up a Child?