"To Train Up a Child"... - Page 3 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 06:30 PM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have to go for a few hours, but I look forward to talking more with you all later.
Kateana is offline  
#62 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 06:30 PM
 
annettemarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the Restricted Section
Posts: 41,827
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
You my want to hop over to the religious studies board in the spirituality forum- there was a HUGE discussion on spanking and Christianity the other day

Flowers, fairies, gardens, and rainbows-- Seasons of Joy: 10 weeks of crafts, handwork, painting, coloring, circle time, fairy tales, and more!
Check out the blog for family fun, homeschooling, books, simple living, and 6 fabulous children, including twin toddlers

annettemarie is offline  
#63 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 07:04 PM
 
pamelamama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: *dwelling on spelling*
Posts: 5,987
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think I've removed the rule-breaking posts. If not, please bring them to my attention via PM. Please remember the forum guidelines:

Quote:
Welcome to Gentle Discipline. This forum has a specific aim: to help parents learn and apply gentle discipline methods in raising their children.


Quote:
Effective discipline is based on loving guidance. It is based on the belief that children are born innately good and that our role as parents is to nurture their spirits as they learn about limits and boundaries, rather than to curb their tendencies toward wrongdoing. Effective discipline presumes that children have reasons for their behavior and that cooperation can be engaged to solve shared problems.

Hitting is never the best way to teach a child. Even in the case of real danger - as when a child runs out into the road - you can grab him, sit him down, look him in the eyes, and tell him why he must never do that again. The panic in your voice will communicate your message much more effectively than any spanking. You can be dramatic without being abusive.

'Natural Family Living' by Peggy O'Mara



Please appreciate that this forum is not a place to uphold or advocate physical punishment of children. Personal preferences for and encouragement of use of physical punishment are inappropriately posted here. Posts of that nature will be edited by the member upon request or will be removed.

Please feel free to discuss your problems and needs with the intent to learn more about Gentle Discipline.
pamelamama is offline  
#64 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 07:27 PM
Banned
 
DebraBaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 5,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I cannot overemphasize the danger of coercing children to obey every adult.

Pediphiles seek out and prey upon such children.

I think the new poster is representing her parents' not her own personal point of view.

Sort of playing Devil's Advocate rather than her own views.

In that light I welcome her thoughts.

Debra Baker
DebraBaker is offline  
#65 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 07:35 PM
 
LizD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: with all the madmen
Posts: 2,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have had various things to say while reading this but am unsure what to include and how to do it. I don't ever, ever, ever advocate hitting children, but sometimes the best of parents give their children a swat and it's not the end of the world. It's also not something that should be repeated or meted out in some kind of chit system of discipline. Frankly that's the creepiest thing I find about these "methods" of training or discipline: the recipes for how to do it properly.

FWIW I do know many AP folks who, when their babies first bite them at the breast, react by flicking them or some other sharp instinctive response. I myself have not, but I do know many who have and they don't otherwise advocate or use corporal punishment.

I read the sample chapter of the Pearl's book online (my daughter asked how they could have a website if they're Amish ) and it seems pretty stupid if you ask me. But at risk of offending people I think most religion is hooey, too.

As far as I have ever been able to understand it the "rod" refers to a shepherd's rod and anybody knows you don't hit sheep. You nudge them along with the stick if they're going the wrong way. Dr Sears (who has some Christian-focused literature available as well as his more commonly known books) makes this same analogy.

As a landowner in PA (though I do not live there) and in defense of the Amish, I will say that, as someone said about Christians, most whom I have met would not advocate this treatment of children (or animals). Most Amish are not sister-raping, drug-dealing animal-abusing puppy farmers (to include references to some recent news stories). Most just fasten their clothes with straight pins and grow some mighty good corn.
LizD is offline  
#66 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 07:36 PM
 
pammysue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mountains of S. California
Posts: 1,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kateana
However, love and peace also include justice, and having no consequences for our actions would be unjust, and therefore ungodly.
No one here is saying there should be no consequences for behavior. Just that the consequences should be natural (when possible), logical and appropriate. Switching a baby becuase they do not come to you the first time you call is not natural, logical or appropriate. It seems to me you are teaching your child "after Mommy says my name, she comes over to hurt me. So next time Mommy calls my name I should be ready to be hurt" How is this teaching a child to come to you?

It is unreasonable to expect a 10 month old to come to you when you call them or not touch everything on the coffee table when they pull up there.

I read something recently (I am sorry I have no idea where, maybe here!) that really resonated with me. The idea of gentle discipline is to help your children learn and to do so in a way that leaves them feeling better about themselves.

As for the nose-to-nose punishment, my problem is that it is not natural, logical or approprite and it does not teach children anything. It is a much better idea to help children work through things. ie, Bobby, you may use the car after Jane is finished. Jane, Bobby is using the car, you may use it when he is finished. The idea being that someday Bobby will be able to say to Jane "I'm using this but when I am done I will give it to you."

Pamstillheart.gif Cliffguitar.gif Malachi 5/08 bouncy.gif   Judah 5/10 jog.gif  Eden 8/12 babygirl.gif Asher 8/12 babyboy.gif

 
 You can't get a cup of tea big enough or a book long enough to suit me. ~CS Lewis

pammysue is offline  
#67 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 07:43 PM
 
LizD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: with all the madmen
Posts: 2,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The nose-to-nose thing sounded like it could be positive if used properly, depending on the situation. It reminds me a bit of some things we did now and then in the Waldorf kindergarten though I doubt anyone would do that particular thing there precisely because of the "invasion of space" aspect. With siblings in your own family, though, it seems it could be an amusing way to make sparring kids turn their argument into laughter. It also seems it could backfire badly, but of course I am used to dealing with children who've not had their spirits broken and souls saved as the Pearls recommend.
LizD is offline  
#68 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 08:02 PM
 
gentlestrengths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ft. Riley, KS
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evan&Anna's_Mom
For those who haven't encountered this before... This is the Pearls at their worst. They have a whole website of this ... garbage... and it is utterly poisen. You are right, their premise is that children are, at birth, utterly displeasing to God and must be broken to obey parents and God with unquestioning and instant obediance. They base their arguements on some very twisted readings of scriptures and claim their way is the only way to raise children and be Christian. For those of us in the GD world, this is about as sickening as it gets.

THIS IS NOT THE WAY ALL CHRISTIANS THINK!!!! Please, this stuff always starts a backlash against all of us who call ourselves Christians. Really, these people are not the norm and the vast majority of Christians do not believe or act this way.
Hi. I'm a Christian. I've gone back and forth between GD, and the Pearls' idea of discipline. When I was a child I was spanked (w/hands, belts, wooden spoons..), and I was yelled at (a lot). That was my parents way - they really didn't know any better (now they do) at the time. Anyway, I've forgiven them for that. But when I was a kid I remember thinking "I will never spank my children, I think it's wrong" - well, I have spanked. I did it because I was raised that way, and in all honesty, it was TRULY almost an instinctual thing for me to do at the time. I'm not saying that was right, because I don't feel that it is. But I do think that it depends a lot about how you're raised. I've found other ways now (GD), and I'm happier for it. BUT - I don't think that people who follow the Pearls are wrong. To me, it is none of my business what other people do with their children. I think that every person needs to read and find their own way of doing things. I am not always the BEST GD parent, by any means - but I continue to read and listen to others who can share ideas and learn from them. Likewise, people who follow the Pearls truly believe they're doing what is best for them and their family. It's like this to me: We have chosen not to vaccinate our children. We don't delay, we don't selectively vaccinate, we just don't do it at all. There are PLENTY of people here at MDC that DO vaccinate. I do *not* tell them that I think they're horrible parents that are endangering the life of their child (and I don't think that btw, just trying to be dramatic here ). Likewise, I wouldn't tell someone who was interested in the TTUAC techniques that it was crap and needed to be burned, etc. I think it's a choice for everyone - and I think a better approach to bringing someone to the GD side of things is to explain their differences, and your belief in why one is wrong and the other is right. Not just bashing one or the other. Factual information is always better than just slamming words!

Anyway, this is just my opinion on the matter, and for some reason I felt compelled to share. Thanks for listening.

Amanda, wife to my best friend Josh, Mommy to Jenna, Lukas, Adam, Livea and Ethan!
gentlestrengths is offline  
#69 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 08:18 PM
Banned
 
DebraBaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 5,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Some things are debatable and some things are just too horrible to be debated.

Pearlesque parenting is abuse in most jurisdictions. It is abuse in my opinion. If I was a family law judge I would take accusations seriously and would take action against parents who implemented Pearls' advice.

Do you believe you should stay married to a man who raped your children? Michael Pearl does. He thinks you should welcome him back into your home and marriage bed when he gets out of jail.

If that isn't sick what is?

DB
DebraBaker is offline  
#70 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 08:25 PM
 
annettemarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the Restricted Section
Posts: 41,827
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Likewise, people who follow the Pearls truly believe they're doing what is best for them and their family.
Well, they would be wrong.
Quote:
Likewise, I wouldn't tell someone who was interested in the TTUAC techniques that it was crap and needed to be burned, etc. I think it's a choice for everyone - and I think a better approach to bringing someone to the GD side of things is to explain their differences, and your belief in why one is wrong and the other is right.
[/QUOTE]
When I see someone doing something that could, in the extreme, kill their child and will probably, in the best case, damage their relationship with their child, all in the name of God, I have absolutely no problem calling it what it is- abusive, heretical, nand non-Biblical.

Flowers, fairies, gardens, and rainbows-- Seasons of Joy: 10 weeks of crafts, handwork, painting, coloring, circle time, fairy tales, and more!
Check out the blog for family fun, homeschooling, books, simple living, and 6 fabulous children, including twin toddlers

annettemarie is offline  
#71 of 207 Old 02-13-2005, 08:30 PM
 
pamelamama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: *dwelling on spelling*
Posts: 5,987
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Temporarily closing this thread.

I am going to temporarily close this thread so we can take a deep breath and come back to the discussion without insulting others, which is a violation of the user agreement.
pamelamama is offline  
#72 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 02:45 AM
Administrator
 
cynthia mosher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: An Arabian kingdom far far away
Posts: 28,872
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Hello mamas

I'm posting this directly to the thread for the benefit of the entire community as well as anyone who comes here to do a search on "To Raise Up a Child" or the Pearls. As we have done this dance several times with members defending this book and it's authors and adherents, it might help to address things here for everyone to read.

gentlestrengths, on the issue of vaccinations Mothering does not hold a complete and unequivocal advocacy against vaccinations. Mothering and MDC advocates informed decision and the right to make that decision rather than forced or 'the doctor said so' vaccination.

Contrary to this is corporal punishment. Mothering upholds a very strong and unequivocal advocacy against physical and emotional punishment of a child. There is no leeway there, no "informed decision" that would support a parent that chooses to use such punishment to discipline their child.

That doesn't mean that a parent that normally upholds gentle discipline as a rule would never, out of blind anger or loss of control, hit their child. That's something you brought up as well Kateana. I'm sure it happens to some as we have seen posts from parents who have come here to admit such and seek support and help. They may be the very people who were hit as children. But that does not put them on the same page as the Pearls or those who practice TTUAC. There's a tremendous difference.


I'll assume, Kateana, that you did not read the rules of the Gentle Discipline forum. Perhaps you read the general rules in the User Agreement and missed the fact that this forum has more specific rules that specifically do not permit a defense of opinion that hitting a child is appropriate discipline. To defend an such an opinion is, in our definition, advocacy of hittting. Now that you know that, you can post to understand why the advice in the book is wrong but not to defend your opinion that it is not wrong. You seem inclined to explore the issue. I invite you to do that but without defending or advocating physical punishment.

I also invite our members to remember that a child is behind a parent posting to these discussions. If you have that child's best interests at heart you will serve that cause much more by posting in a respectful manner. Let's avoid the use of statements such as "a load of crap" and "freakin' fanatics". Better words can be used to open doors of communication. For the sake of the children we don't want to close those doors.

This thread is reopened for what we hope will be beneficial discussion. Any subsequent posts that defend this book, it's authors, or practice of the teachings therein will be removed and the member warned.

Peace mamas

cynthia mosher is online now  
#73 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 03:06 AM
 
pamelamama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: *dwelling on spelling*
Posts: 5,987
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
thanks CM!
pamelamama is offline  
#74 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 03:39 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by our veggie baby
I completely agree. I am happy that you are seeking out other ways to discipline and hopefully you will learn a lot of alternative, more effective (imo) ways to do that here, however, the previous poster is right about the Pearls. I wouldn't even treat my dog the way they advocate treating children. I don't believe you "train" a child, so that is their first mistake. You guide a child, teach a child, protect a child, love a child--training is more for animals and don't even get me started on that either as I am a staunch animal rights activist yet I digress...
I completely understand your aversion to the word "train"... that was my first reaction when I saw the book. I think that word is used mostly b/c it is a direct quote (of part of a verse) from the King James Bible. From my understanding, it was meant to be "teach". At least, that is how I always took it...

Quote:
Originally Posted by our veggie baby
See, the first step in my humble opinion, is seeing children as people. It is funny to me actually (in a sad way) that we finally for the most part, see African Americans as people instead of animals who needed to be controlled, whipped, owned etc...we finally (for the most part) see women as people who have the right to exsist, to have a voice, to have a right to an opinion--where as recent as 100 years ago that wasn't the case....one of the last frontiers is seeing children as actual people and not as property or as little sinful troublemakers who are trying to make our lives difficult. To actually see them as little people who want all the same things we do--love, understanding, guidence, a voice, an opinion, an important place to belong...and DESERVE the same things we do--not to be yelled at or hit, or shamed, or to be controlled like some second class citizens...
I was raised being spanked, like most of us probably were, so I never equated it with thinking a child was sub-human. My dad (I was raised by him, w/o my mom) did excessively spank, and yet I never felt afraid of him, or like he thought badly of me. I guess even then, I understood that he was doing what he thought was right, and that he loved me. I know that it was balanced with lots of fun, and a good relationship. So, while I see what you're saying, and I agree, I do not think that the viewpoints (subhuman, sinful troublemakers, etc) and spanking always go hand in hand, in the same way that you can have time outs, and you can have isolation, and you can have both together, KWIM?

Quote:
Originally Posted by our veggie baby
Yes, we do have a greater responsibility as their parents to guide them, lead them, gently steer them towards being compassionate, productive, well adjusted, happy people...but please do tell me how we are to achieve that by acting in manners which are punishing, unproductive, unhealthy, shaming, controlling...it just doesn't make sense.
Yes, there is the option of instilling fear in your children, which to me is not a viable one for several reasons. One being that it is unhealthy emotionally and can damage them far into adulthood. Two being that one day they won't be scared of you and that is where ALL of the pent up resentment and anger and hurt comes out....among several other things.
Anyone that would have the goal of instilling fear in their children should be sterilized. Is there a study or something that shows how many spanked children did in fact fear their parents, and how many are really damaged by it, and how the spanking was done... or anything? All I know is my experience, along with the knowledge that spanking CAN lead to abuse (like many other forms of discipline, I'm sure).

Quote:
Originally Posted by our veggie baby
We teach our children "treat others as you would like to be treated" and yet many of us do exactly the opposite!!! I mean, as an adult, the hypocritical "do as I say not as I do" attitude bugs the @#$#@ out of me....and it doesn't fly with children either...they can smell it from a mile away and in one way or another will call you on it (rightfully so)...
The one I'm noticing most recently is the "If you don't talk like us (or look like us or act like us), you can't play with us" mentality. Hopefully the MDC kids out there don't see that going on IRL... I would like to think that when my kids grow up, they can talk with other, differently minded adults, and have good conversation and learn from each other. I hope that my kids also learn to seek out the truth, even when they are told to shut up about what they think.

This rat wasn't just for you, OVB, b/c you seem to be very nice and willing to talk this out with me, but rather for whoever thinks it's bad for me to pose Q's here... the FA, maybe?

ANYways, I really hope my kids do call me on any hypocrisy they might see in my parenting or other areas of life. Kids are so aware of things that many adults aren't, and I hope that they correct me, rather than take up a hypocrisy of mine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by our veggie baby
I am not saying let your child go completely wild and run the whole house, which is a lot of people's fear when they are not familiar with gentle discipline etc, but you have to come from a place first of all where you know and believe that children AREN'T inherently evil, that 99% of the time, the WANT to please you, WANT to make you happy, WANT to do well...and that is your starting point to guiding them and teaching them....taking every oppurtunity to teach and to learn...
So will I completely fail at GD if I believe that humans are born with a sinful nature, or a conflict between Spirit and Flesh?
Kateana is offline  
#75 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:00 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by famousmockngbrd
I know you are probably feeling like we are all ganging up on you, but surely you know there are many children, Christian and non-Christian alike, who are abducted and abused and worse every day? Did God not want to protect those chldren? Being Christian does not mean nothing bad will ever happen to you.

About the nose-to-nose thing... what I don't like about it is it's an invasion of the child's physical space. Forced physical contact is not respectful. In "Kids Are Worth It" (a great book to read if you are interested in learning more about GD, BTW), the author describes a similar method where the fighting kids have to sit on the couch together, and neither of them can get up until they both have given each other permission to. IMO this is a better approach because it gives the kids more power over their own fate and allows them to determine when the problem is resolved, instead of the more punitive way of having them stand nose to nose until you say they can stop.
Well, I did come onto a thread where everyone was HATING a book that I have read, and didn't hate. So I knew I'd be ganged up on. And I'm ok with that. I know people are passionate about what they believe, and sometime lose their respect for people who believe otherwise. What I failed to mention from the beginning, and I keep trying to tell people, is that I am here to learn. I failed to explain that while I am a Christian, I am usually shunned by people in Christian circles... b/c I am a Truth seeker, not a blind follower. So, while I read and liked TTUAC, I do want other views so I can make a balanced and informed decision, based on my standard of Truth, the Bible. Some people have brought up very good points that I am considering, and still trying to address (particularly the part about the conflict between "spare the rod" and Jesus being the ultimate peacenic). Someone wisely suggested that I go to the Religion forum. I think I may be better recieved (and treated) there, or at least I would like to think so. However, I am enjoying this thread despite people who lose their temper.

I hope I am gentle in saying that you are insulting me by pointing out something as rediculously obvious as "bad things happen to Christians, too". But I can take it. While I do not agree with everything my parents do to raise my sisters, I know they are better off there, in an exceptionally well-balanced home, than in foster care, or even with other members of the family. My parents are also Truth seekers, and while they do not always come to the same conclusions as I do, they are not bad people.

Wouldn't the "sitting on the couch" thing give each kid control over the other?
Kateana is offline  
#76 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:03 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkey's mom
These people are advocating hitting babies under the age of one year old with a whip. How in the name of all that is holy is that not 100% dangerous advice??

I'm sure there's some stuff in the neo-nazi literature that could be OK too, but given the OVERALL SCOPE of their message, I certainly wouldn't defend or advocate their teachings or actions.
Point taken.
Kateana is offline  
#77 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:08 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by famousmockngbrd
I just would like to say quickly that the end result is not necessarily the goal in parenting. It would be nice if we could measure our success as parents by how well our children turn out, but we can't. There are plenty of horrible parents out there whose kids manage to become well adjusted adults in spite of them, and there are also plenty of great parents whose kids end up in drug rehab or prison. Parenting is not a results oriented undertaking in many ways, unfortunately. It is much more about the process, about how you do things, and the lessons you teach in the little things that make up your days. If you are coming from a philosophy of kindness, respect and cooperation, your actions will reflect that. If your POV is one of control and domination, your actions will bear that out also. All we can do is guide, instruct and model. Our kids will choose their own path.
True, true... As much as I want to prepare for having kids, I know that I have to do what I believe is right, and pray and trust that they will turn out decent, and hopefully even good! I hope my kids will learn the one thing I learned from my dad: don't take anyone's word for it...
Kateana is offline  
#78 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:14 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie
Really? The you saw this:
Yes, particularly the part about "to help parents learn and apply gentle discipline methods in raising their children." and "Please feel free to discuss your problems and needs with the intent to learn more about Gentle Discipline.", which it seems a lot of other people have missed.

:
Kateana is offline  
#79 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:21 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DebraBaker
I cannot overemphasize the danger of coercing children to obey every adult.

Pediphiles seek out and prey upon such children.

I think the new poster is representing her parents' not her own personal point of view.

Sort of playing Devil's Advocate rather than her own views.

In that light I welcome her thoughts.

Debra Baker
You are so kind to be one of the few people who are actually nice in here, while disagreeing.

I can't agree more about making kids obey every adult. It saddens me to see it with my sisters...

You are mostly right about me telling my dad's views. I have, though, read the book, and I thought it was ok. But I also am more concerned with learning, and doing what is right, than saying, "Yup, I've found something to subscribe to, and I won't budge." Since my dad is/was a spanker, I grew up thinking it was ok, and I am trying to figure out if I need to change that. Having said that, I really appreciate the people like you in here.
Kateana is offline  
#80 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:33 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizD
As far as I have ever been able to understand it the "rod" refers to a shepherd's rod and anybody knows you don't hit sheep. You nudge them along with the stick if they're going the wrong way. Dr Sears (who has some Christian-focused literature available as well as his more commonly known books) makes this same analogy.
Thank you thank you thank you! This is the specific issue I needed addressed, and I thank you. That is very good insight. Being raised in a Christian, pro-spanking house, I was taught that the rod was a spanking "tool", b/c it isn't good to hit with your hand, or a child will flinch unnecessarily, yadda, yadda. You have given me a bit more clarity on this, and I so appreciate it.

Where do I find the Sears' Christian-focused stuff?
Kateana is offline  
#81 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:50 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pammysue
No one here is saying there should be no consequences for behavior. Just that the consequences should be natural (when possible), logical and appropriate. Switching a baby becuase they do not come to you the first time you call is not natural, logical or appropriate. It seems to me you are teaching your child "after Mommy says my name, she comes over to hurt me. So next time Mommy calls my name I should be ready to be hurt" How is this teaching a child to come to you?

It is unreasonable to expect a 10 month old to come to you when you call them or not touch everything on the coffee table when they pull up there.

I read something recently (I am sorry I have no idea where, maybe here!) that really resonated with me. The idea of gentle discipline is to help your children learn and to do so in a way that leaves them feeling better about themselves.

As for the nose-to-nose punishment, my problem is that it is not natural, logical or approprite and it does not teach children anything. It is a much better idea to help children work through things. ie, Bobby, you may use the car after Jane is finished. Jane, Bobby is using the car, you may use it when he is finished. The idea being that someday Bobby will be able to say to Jane "I'm using this but when I am done I will give it to you."
The reasonable-ness of switching a baby isn't disputed here, as far as I know...

First of all, let me clarify that the nose-to-nose issue wasn't intended to be taken as a blanket discipline tool, like a time out. My problem with always giving kids *repetitive* explanations for things, is that it is so BORING for everyone involved. I would have LOVED it if my parents were creative, or had a sense of humor and sometimes acted like a kid, or thought like me rather than treating me like an adult all the time. Explaining something once is fine, and indeed very respectful of the child's intelligence, etc. But to repeat the same lesson over and over (hoping that one day they get it) seems pointless and frustrating. Especially when something like standing nose-to-nose isn't harmful. And I do think it teaches something: first of all, not to always take everything so seriously, that perspective can change everything (my sister looks like she has one eye from here), and that it is good (and so much more fun) to be peacable with a sibling. The whole reason I brought up the example to begin with was b/c I think that there are some really interesting and fun ways to teach lessons. Personally, I think it is easy to forget lectures, and easier to tune people out when they are giving them in the first place.
Kateana is offline  
#82 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:56 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DebraBaker
Some things are debatable and some things are just too horrible to be debated.

Pearlesque parenting is abuse in most jurisdictions. It is abuse in my opinion. If I was a family law judge I would take accusations seriously and would take action against parents who implemented Pearls' advice.

Do you believe you should stay married to a man who raped your children? Michael Pearl does. He thinks you should welcome him back into your home and marriage bed when he gets out of jail.

If that isn't sick what is?

DB
You seem to be like many people who have to either believe everything or nothing a person says. It's too bad... there are a lot of people who have some good points and some bad. There is a saying that you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater, but I guess it only applies to discerning people...
Kateana is offline  
#83 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 04:59 AM
 
pamelamama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: *dwelling on spelling*
Posts: 5,987
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Check the sticky at the top of the forum regarding no-spank resources!
pamelamama is offline  
#84 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 05:04 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie
Well, they would be wrong.
When I see someone doing something that could, in the extreme, kill their child and will probably, in the best case, damage their relationship with their child, all in the name of God, I have absolutely no problem calling it what it is- abusive, heretical, non-Biblical crap.[/QUOTE]

When something is taken to the extreme, it is usually a different matter altogether. (And I am trying to illustrate the something done to the extreme is not the same as something done in moderation, or rarely. It seems obvious, but you seem to need to hear it...) For example, eating done in the extreme could kill someone. But that doesn't mean it is bad for a person to eat in general.

"Could be" and "is" are different things. It is so strange to me that this even needs to be said...
Kateana is offline  
#85 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 05:27 AM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthia Mosher
Hello mamas

Contrary to this is corporal punishment. Mothering upholds a very strong and unequivocal advocacy against physical and emotional punishment of a child. There is no leeway there, no "informed decision" that would support a parent that chooses to use such punishment to discipline their child.

That doesn't mean that a parent that normally upholds gentle discipline as a rule would never, out of blind anger or loss of control, hit their child. That's something you brought up as well Kateana. I'm sure it happens to some as we have seen posts from parents who have come here to admit such and seek support and help. They may be the very people who were hit as children. But that does not put them on the same page as the Pearls or those who practice TTUAC. There's a tremendous difference.


I'll assume, Kateana, that you did not read the rules of the Gentle Discipline forum. Perhaps you read the general rules in the User Agreement and missed the fact that this forum has more specific rules that specifically do not permit a defense of opinion that hitting a child is appropriate discipline. To defend an such an opinion is, in our definition, advocacy of hittting. Now that you know that, you can post to understand why the advice in the book is wrong but not to defend your opinion that it is not wrong. You seem inclined to explore the issue. I invite you to do that but without defending or advocating physical punishment.

Peace mamas
I just got to your post, CM, so I hope that instead of deleting an entire post, you would be so kind as to take out the offensive part. However, I believe that I have been doing an ok job of telling people what I need addressed. Yes, I do believe certain things that others do not, but as I said, I am here to learn, and the things I talk about here are things I would like addressed, things I have questions about. If you delete what I say, I will unfortunately remain in ignorance about that particular point. Being so adamant about your beliefs (and I am referring to all the posters here that don't agree with spanking), I would hope that you would take this as an opportunity to enlighten me, since that is what I am here for. As I have repeatedly said, I am not here to convince anyone, but rather to learn from you.

It also seems to me, (but apparently I am wrong?) that saying "I believe" is very different than "You should". I have tried over and over to let you all know that I came from a spanking home, didn't know differently, and this is my first experience learning about GDing, which I would like to know more about.

It is sad to me that a forum should be so regulated as to have a FM have to tell us how to treat each other. It seems that many adults need to learn respect and kindness as well as kids... Not to mention that we are not trusted to talk to each other about differing views... Really, I can understand if I was trying to push spanking on others, but it is really sad to me that it has come to this. Maybe I am misunderstanding, also... can I talk about this with people on a different forum? Or will I be censored for saying what my current beliefs are, even though I am very open to changing them...?
Kateana is offline  
#86 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 06:25 AM
Administrator
 
cynthia mosher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: An Arabian kingdom far far away
Posts: 28,872
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Kati, I have no intention to delete any part of your posts. I'm just asking that you refrain from further defense of hitting and those who hit.

It's fine that you want to explore this issue here. That's a purpose of the forum. But there's a huge difference in saying "Please explain to me how this is wrong and what is better" and saying "I believe the Pearl's approach has some benefit" while backing it up with experience and opinion. The latter conveys a desire to support the Pearls and hitting children while the former expresses a desire to examine why the Pearl's way is wrong and what you can do better.

Unfortunately, though we have clear rules in place people interpret them differently and sometimes ignore them completely. So moderation is necessary on a forum such as MDC. It has nothing to do with trust. It has to do with the reality of what people will say and do in defending their beliefs.

"I believe" is a personal advocation of something. "You should" is a step further.

Ask questions. Set the stating of your beliefs and defense of them aside. If you can do that then you will probably be welcomed and offered plenty of help and support in your desire to learn gentle discipline.

cynthia mosher is online now  
#87 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 12:40 PM
 
annettemarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the Restricted Section
Posts: 41,827
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kateana
When something is taken to the extreme, it is usually a different matter altogether. (And I am trying to illustrate the something done to the extreme is not the same as something done in moderation, or rarely. It seems obvious, but you seem to need to hear it...) For example, eating done in the extreme could kill someone. But that doesn't mean it is bad for a person to eat in general.
But that's the whole point- To Train Up a Child is extreme- the whole book is extreme. To follow the book, as written, is to engage in extreme parenting. That is what makes it so scary.

Hitting a baby with a rod is extreme.

No allowing a child to ever express their feelings if they are in opposition to yours is extreme.

Forcing a child to smile when they feel like crying is extreme.

Pushing a child in a pond and letting them almost drown is extreme.

Flowers, fairies, gardens, and rainbows-- Seasons of Joy: 10 weeks of crafts, handwork, painting, coloring, circle time, fairy tales, and more!
Check out the blog for family fun, homeschooling, books, simple living, and 6 fabulous children, including twin toddlers

annettemarie is offline  
#88 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 12:53 PM
 
BlueStateMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: New England
Posts: 3,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Something I saw way earlier in this thread, and I'm not quoting exactly, but I don't understand.....how exactly does one hit "with love"? (this was in the context of using physical punishment as disciplining, and then saying that discipline was done "with love"?) I don't get it...

Why is it people can defend hitting children as being done "with love"...has anyone ever hauled off and smacked their spouse, coworker, or neighbor "with love"?

Mama to DS (8) and DD (7) Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of Buddhism is not "Every man for himself." And the London Underground is not a political movement.

 

BlueStateMama is offline  
#89 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 01:03 PM
 
LizD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: with all the madmen
Posts: 2,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well, I only read that sample first chapter online, but it made no sense and was just bizarre IMO. I was quite disturbed to see the comment on this thread about "[welcoming back a rapist to the marriage bed]," and would appreciate more clarification on that.

What a waste of time, to have a whole method of corporal punishment, when you could simply be enjoying your children and being a good parent with common sense. Sometimes you have to be quite stern with an older child, yes, very firm indeed; but what I read was about "training" a baby. It is completely contrary to what is now known about psychological and physical development, and the authors made wild blanket statements about the dire consequences of raising a "badly trained" child. Again, I don't know many people (even Amish, even Christians ) who treat their animals that badly, let alone their children.

The author makes ridiculous comparisons, too. Why would you want to run a family the way they run the Army (guess the Pearls haven't seen Full Metal Jacket, eh?)? And when you "break" a horse, you "gentle him;" the Pearls make no mention of how carefully, how gently, how kindly you need to train a colt; they just mention the total submission that is the result of training a horse well. But you don't hit a horse so that it stings.

They also describe a method for keeping your baby from snatching people's glasses. I have never met a baby who snatched glasses to the point that he needed to be hit. Most people think it's sweet and amusing when Baby tries to get Uncle's unfamiliar glasses. My baby doesn't usually bother my glasses or my daughter's anymore, and we didn't need to hit him or even tell him no. I don't even know how we "did it." Probably just gently moved his hand away and said something like "That's Mommy's."

It just seems a shame to me that the authors of this book seem so warped they can't enjoy parenting for what it is. If there is any sort of god out there, why would it be so malign as to want you to treat your babies this way?
LizD is offline  
#90 of 207 Old 02-14-2005, 03:53 PM
 
Kateana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie
But that's the whole point- To Train Up a Child is extreme- the whole book is extreme. To follow the book, as written, is to engage in extreme parenting. That is what makes it so scary.

Hitting a baby with a rod is extreme.

No allowing a child to ever express their feelings if they are in opposition to yours is extreme.

Forcing a child to smile when they feel like crying is extreme.

Pushing a child in a pond and letting them almost drown is extreme.
What I heard you say, and I seem to be mistaken, is that something (spanking) taken to the extreme (beating to death) could kill and is therefore abuse.

I agree thast those things are extreme, but that they kill, I think is a bit extreme to say.
Kateana is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off