Anderson Cooper Rocks/Pearls=Another Death (MERGED)

[Buzzard]

Even the onion chimes in on the matter:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/fak ... 06545.html

SANTA ROSA, CA—A study released by the California Parenting Institute Tuesday shows that every style of parenting inevitably causes children to grow into profoundly unhappy adults. "Our research suggests that while overprotective parenting ultimately produces adults unprepared to contend with life's difficulties, highly permissive parenting leads to feelings of bitterness and isolation throughout adulthood," lead researcher Daniel Porter said. "And, interestingly, we found that anything between those two extremes is equally damaging, always resulting in an adult who suffers from some debilitating combination of unpreparedness and isolation. Despite great variance in parenting styles across populations, the end product is always the same: a profoundly flawed and joyless human being." The study did find, however, that adults often achieve temporary happiness when they have children of their own to perpetuate the cycle of human misery.

[Austin]

Even the onion chimes in on the matter:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/fak ... 06545.html

Profoundly flawed and joyless human being? Hmmm. . . can we think of any people like that?

[Brainsample]

Great commentary on the original Pearl video:

(I can't figure out how to embed it.)

[Brainsample]

Does anyone think this video is worthy of its own thread?

I hate to see it get lost as it drops further down on the index of active topics.

[Austin]

Here it is:

4A8_Xg1Ga4g

Feel free to start a new thread if you like. I always think this topic is a worthwhile discussion.

[apple1]

There is good commentary there, but I disagree with the conclusion that the CNN interview did more harm than good. Maybe I am naive, but I think that the average viewer would see through Pearl's stuff, and I think that there may indeed be a method to CNN's "madness". I think that the truth is actually getting out there, albeit in bits and pieces. I suspect that CNN (and some other networks also) are not finished with this story.

I personally would have liked to see more depth, though...

[emmiedahl]

I don't think they were harsh enough on Michael Pearl. Like I said, I wish they had run his own quotes below his face while he was talking and backtracking.

[emmiedahl]

Here is an example in which Michael Pearl advises a parent to hit a two-year-old until he stops crying when he cries about being in a carseat during a long trip. The article notes that the child had been spanked repeatedly with a switch, the father stopping to spank him every few minutes for 20 miles of a long drive.

What if the boy didn’t stop? Would you spank him forever, or would you stop when it bordered on abuse, in which case the child would win? Your word would fall to the ground; you gave in before he did. You would have actually hardened his resolve to rebel. Furthermore, when a child is being spanked and shortly thereafter, he may be too emotionally wrought to make responsible decisions.

Pearl seems to be saying, don't stop when your actions border on abuse. Keep hitting that kid until he shuts up.

Link: nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2009/october/08/child-training-marathon-revisited-and-updated/

[treemom]

Link: nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2009/october/08/child-training-marathon-revisited-and-updated/

If hitting, switching, flicking, softly smacking a child has to be called a marathon you have gone to far.

[FJSharkJump]

So The Cholera has yet to return, eh?

I hope it is because he is too busy begging his children's forgiveness for beating them and promising, on his knees to his god, that he will never hit them again.

[Brainsample]

This is another resource concerning the Pearls, available as a free download: scitascienda.com/scienda-store/#free

I don't know if it was mentioned here before?

Parenting in the Name of God: No Greater Joy Ministries and the Bible

Is the child-training method of homeschool business No Greater Joy Ministries responsible for the death of a child? Sean Paddock (2006) and Lydia Schatz (2010) both died at the hands of parents who allegedly followed Michael Pearl’s child training method. But what influence, if any, can Pearl’s teachings be said to have had on the parents’ thinking?

In the wake of intense online debate and controversy in 2010, we undertook an in-depth review of NGJ’s theological basis. The e-book is 76 pages, and is available for free download as a ministry to the Christian homeschooling community and other interested parties. It was assembled with the assistance of a 10-member review team who provided theological and editorial guidance for the project.

[thoughtful]

I just found this -- haven't had a chance to read it yet:

http://www.quicksilverqueen.com/2011/10 ... roduction/

[thoughtful]

For anyone who wants anti-TTUAC merchandise:

http://www.cafepress.com/ttuac

[Paisy]

Here is an example in which Michael Pearl advises a parent to hit a two-year-old until he stops crying when he cries about being in a carseat during a long trip. The article notes that the child had been spanked repeatedly with a switch, the father stopping to spank him every few minutes for 20 miles of a long drive.

Pearl seems to be saying, don't stop when your actions border on abuse. Keep hitting that kid until he shuts up.

Link: nogreaterjoy.org/articles/general-view/archive/2009/october/08/child-training-marathon-revisited-and-updated/

Reminds me of the old, "You better stop cryin' or I'll give you somethin' to cry about!" which I never understood as a child and now that I'm an adult I still don't understand it?

[Austin]

I watched the video and agree that the CNN reporter could have been better prepared. There are so many quotes he could have used directly from the book, put them up on the screen, that would have really let people know what POS Michael and Debi Pearl are. Then let the ass go into his description of hitting a kid FIFTEEN TIMES with a belt and how that's just completely normal and not abusive.

I just think that a lot of people who are at most, only vaguely aware of this book because of what they've seen on CNN or whatever may assume this is just disagreement over spanking, and some parents who took it too far. No, it's much, much more than that.

My hope is that CNN will continue to follow this, with updates, and expose more and more of the evil.

Having said all of that, I am very glad that CNN even did this story to begin with. I can only imagine the zillions of emails they got from "god-fearing, kid-spanking" Christians about how spanking is a perfectly moral way to punish children.

[thoughtful]

I watched the video and agree that the CNN reporter could have been better prepared. There are so many quotes he could have used directly from the book, put them up on the screen, that would have really let people know what POS Michael and Debi Pearl are. Then let the ass go into his description of hitting a kid FIFTEEN TIMES with a belt and how that's just completely normal and not abusive.

I just think that a lot of people who are at most, only vaguely aware of this book because of what they've seen on CNN or whatever may assume this is just disagreement over spanking, and some parents who took it too far. No, it's much, much more than that.

My hope is that CNN will continue to follow this, with updates, and expose more and more of the evil.

Having said all of that, I am very glad that CNN even did this story to begin with. I can only imagine the zillions of emails they got from "god-fearing, kid-spanking" Christians about how spanking is a perfectly moral way to punish children.

I'm hoping that the first interview was a combination of putting a toe into the water to find out if viewers care about this issue, and staying neutral and going easy to keep Pearl talking so he'd hoist himself by his own petard.

The one in which AC talked to Pearl himself was somewhat more direct, and he quoted some of the more heinous things in the book.

I'm torn between wanting them to go in for the kill, and keeping this "anyone with common sense will see how wrong this is if we just let this guy talk" manner.

Pearl's followers are unlikely to be changed. Those of us who hate all corporal punishment get it, because we never see the need for physically hurting a child.

It's reaching the people in between, who are fine with a switching/licking/smack now and then, and think that's all Pearl advocates, that may be needed.

I think they need to demonstrate how many of his recommendations involve humiliation, bonding a child to an abusive parent, setting a child up so they can't get out of being "wrong," the interpretation of "born a sinner" that is so twisted, and his other misinterpretations of the Bible.

And, they need to keep harping on the "don't stop until the child submits" stuff. Calm or angry, if the parent is supposed to keep going and going, that can lead to death. I think they need to point that out, over and over.

[Brainsample]

I couldn't be more thrilled that CNN had reported on this several times, and hopefully, they will continue and can use this video to inform their future reports. (Same thing thoughtful's saying about the "toe in the water" -- her comment popped up as I went to submit this post.)

I'm also thrilled that they've continued to do some reports on places like Hephzibah House. I heard that they reported on Fairhaven, a similar program to Hephzibah House.

The church will not do it. Pastors and such are too worried about offending people and losing their jobs or their following if they say too much. It breaks my heart that the secular world is going to be the impetus to stop the abuse. I can imagine that it is very difficult to figure out how to put this Pearl stuff into perspective. You don't want to alienate all Christians by going all out after a minister on your first time out. And this stuff is difficult to process.

I hope that CNN keeps at it and gets better and better at it.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I was impressed by the AC interview. Keep in mind that these shows are often produced on a tight schedule, and they don't always have staff that have been following the story as closely as we have. AC was in his "yes, it's clear that you are evil and aren't being truthful with our audience, but thank you for coming on our program" mode. It's the same tone that diplomats get when trying to explain that their governments aren't really killing civilians despite multiple tapes and reporter evidence to the contrary.

I had read the Pearl's story about hitting the 2 yr old repeatedly before, and it still sickens me.

How about this: blame the adults for hauling around a 2 yr old at 11 p.m. in the first place!

I've had kids cry in car seats before. It's not unusual. You learn to anticipate a child's schedule better, and you also learn that it stops once you get going, or once the child falls asleep.

[choleric]

So The Cholera has yet to return, eh?

I hope it is because he is too busy begging his children's forgiveness for beating them and promising, on his knees to his god, that he will never hit them again.

It is called a life. Something I live with real people rather than waste all of my time on forums talking to people who hate God and people who spank.

[choleric]

I don't think they were harsh enough on Michael Pearl. Like I said, I wish they had run his own quotes below his face while he was talking and backtracking.

Here are some quotes for you. Were these the ones you were referring to?

From the Introduction:

This book is not about discipline, nor problem children. The emphasis is on the training of a child before the need to discipline arises. It is apparent that, though they expect obedience, most parents never attempt to train their child to obey. They wait until his behavior becomes unbearable and then explode. With proper training, discipline can be reduced to 5% of what many now practice. As you come to understand the difference between training and discipline, you will have a renewed vision for your family—no more raised voices, no contention, no bad attitudes, fewer spankings, a cheerful atmosphere in the home, and total obedience from your children.

Page 4

“Train up-not beat up. Train up-not discipline up.†“A child needs more than ‘obedience training’, but without first training him, discipline is insufficient†\

Page 9

“Disciplinary actions can easily become excessive and oppressive if you set aside the tool of training and depend on discipline alone to do the training.†Page 9

If parents are frustrated to the point of anger, page 25 says:

When children see you motivated by anger and frustration, they assume that your “discipline†is just a personal matter, a competition of interest. The child thinks of you much as he would of any other child who is bullying him around. He is not being made to respect the law and the lawgiver. He believes that you are forcing him to give in to superior power. When you act in anger, your child feels that you are committing a personal transgression against him—violating his rights. You have lost the dignity of your office. As politicians often say, “You are not presidential enough.†If your child does not see consistency in the lawgiver, in his mind there is no law at all, just competition for supremacy. You have taught yourself to be motivated only by anger. And you have taught your child to respond only to anger. Having failed to properly train your child, you have allowed the seeds of self-indulgence and rebellion to grow to ugly proportions.

Page 32

“Parent, if you are having problems with your children, you can be assured that you are not alone. Your children are also having problems with you. You are going to have to make adjustments in your own life if you are going to help them with their problems.†“… the responsibility for making a significant change is completely yours.â€

If a child is angered by the impatience and pride of parents, page 33 says:

Father, if you care for your child’s soul more than your pride, then humble yourself and ask his forgiveness (even if he is just two years old). Then, become a patient father and husband (Your wife will feel your impatience, too.). Spend time with your child doing things that are creative—things that give him a sense of great adventure or accomplishment. You can’t lead your child closer to God, peace, and discipline than you are yourself.

If parents are given to extreme responses, pages 50 and 51 say:

A CAUTION TO RECIPIENTS OF THE MILLSTONE AWARD

There are always some who act in the extreme. These individuals are capable of using what has been said about the legitimate use of the rod to justify ongoing brutality to their children. I can think of several right now. These abusers of their children would not in the least view themselves as such. They would call themselves “strong disciplinarians.†“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea†(Matt. 18:6).

“The rod should never be a vent for parents’ anger. Where the supreme motivation is anything other than the child’s good, it is inevitable that such behavior by the parent will assuredly create problems.â€

Page 84 says to set a worthy example for children to follow:

PARENTAL PROTOTYPES

Never expect more of your children in the way of attitude than you are of yourself. Happy, well-balanced parents who neglect the rod and reproof will have grouchy, complaining, tantrum-prone children. But in a situation where one or both of the parents are an emotional wreck, not much can be expected from the child. A CHILD IS GOING TO BE THE HARVE ST OF HIS PARE NTS’ TEMPER AMENT. If the mother is sulky, critical, or selfish, the children will have a tendency to be the same. If the father is a bully or full of anger and impatience, his sons will be too. If the father is rude, demanding, and disrespectful of the mother, you can expect the same from his sons. If a father is intemperate or lustful, the children will likely be worse. I have seen many children openly despise their parents’ sins, yet grow up to be just like them. The lesson in this is: YOU MUST BE what you want your child to be—in attitude as well as actions. Don’t try to “beat the ugly†out of a child who is simply a display window of your own heart attitudes.

And page 97 says not to threaten or intimidate children with threats about God:

I have cringed at seeing parents use God to intimidate their children into obedience. A child has been “bad,†and the mother warns, “You shouldn’t do that, God doesn’t like it.†Or worse, “God is going to get you for that.†And again, “Mama might not see it, but God does.†Talk about negative, counter-productive training! If you constrain a child by threatening him with divine displeasure, he will come to hate God and will throw off religion as soon as he is old enough for independent action. It happens with regularity. Never, I say, “NEVER use God to threaten or intimidate your child into compliance.†You are causing the child to associate God with condemnation and rejection. You should teach your children of God’s judgments, of heaven and hell, and the awful consequences of sin, but not as a means to manipulate their daily behavior.

written by Michael Pearl – IN DEFENSE OF BIBLICAL CHASTISEMENT?

When is it abuse?

You are abusing the child when it starts doing harm to the child. Listen to your friends—especially to those friends that share your philosophy. Ask the opinion of people you respect. If they think you are abusive, get counsel in a hurry. Ask the opinion of your older children. If your child is broken in spirit, cowed and subdued, you have a problem. Children should be happy and cheerful, full of enthusiasm and creativity. If your children are fearful or anxious, you should get some counsel.

[choleric]

Hmmmm, managing the environment to protect a child, teaching a preferred behavior, persuading a child to voluntarily make a better choice, and the myriad other ways a child can be guided, are the same as "breaking the will?"

OK, and this color is green.

I mean, really? The many ways that someone might be influenced to change their behavior, change their minds, and learn to make better choices rarely have much to do with one's "will" being broken.

Rigid either-or situations (sin or righteousness, obedience or defiance, my will versus yours) are often false constructs, made up by the person in power at the moment. The Pearls seem to relish them.

I think the fact that Pearl and his followers are caught up in this stuff says something about them, not how life works and how children learn. What it says, I'm not sure -- lack of imagination? A very win-lose way of looking at life? A very rigid view of God?

Whatever it is, it doesn't seem to have much to do with the way children learn and grow.

Do you know what a "will" is? Are you mentally impaired? Have you heard the term "impose my will"? A child's will is something they attempt to impose to get their way. 99% of the time it is completely healthy and does not need to be dealt with. When it is not, the parent corrects it, using a myriad of resources the least of which is spanking. When one child wants to impose their will and hit a sibling, that is unacceptable. One parent will try to get the child to stop, but never change the child's heart. That is gaining obedience and compliance without getting to the childs heart. A good parent will take the time to help the child get to a place of contrition where they not only stop, but they realize they were in the wrong and they determine to not do that again. That is breaking the childs will. It is not evil, nor sinister.

What is funny is you people keep talking about breaking the child's will as if it is something it isn't and none of you can produce an actual explanation other than the one I have. You certainly won't find one contrary to it in the Pearls writings. But that won't deter you. Raging lunacy seems to have good company around here.

[Patsy]

When I make concessions and let other people get their way to maintain peace, I am not 'breaking' my will. I am laying it aside (if that!). I still have it.

You are saying that 'breaking' a child's will means making them realise that it can't control every situation. That is not what 'breaking' a child's will means.

[treemom]

Breaking is different than bending choleric.

[choleric]

His writings portray a narcissist. He may just be a bad writer. Yeah, we know the origin story of the book. The point is, there are lots of situations that you never encounter raising a handful of children. He's not aware of the gamut of situations parents face, especially parents of adopted children. He actively discourages parents from seeking help outside his materials.

Flat lie. I am calling you on this one. Please show a quote where he said anything about not seeking help outside of himself. While I wait for you to never produce such a fact, allow me to show you a quote exactly opposite of your statement:

written by Michael Pearl – IN DEFENSE OF BIBLICAL CHASTISEMENT?

When is it abuse?

You are abusing the child when it starts doing harm to the child. Listen to your friends—especially to those friends that share your philosophy. Ask the opinion of people you respect. If they think you are abusive, get counsel in a hurry. Ask the opinion of your older children. If your child is broken in spirit, cowed and subdued, you have a problem. Children should be happy and cheerful, full of enthusiasm and creativity. If your children are fearful or anxious, you should get some counsel.

My mother has more experience with children than Michael Pearl, as well as aptitude at that task, and it's not just my opinion, but that of hundreds of parents and the supervisors of the school where she worked. The point is, his incompetence is not caused by lack of academic training, though some training would probably help. Systematic observation is the key. That doesn't have to happen in an academic setting.

I can't help but note the hypocrisy in this statement. Surely you see it. You state that you mother has this great aptitude at child training because, well, she has some well adjusted kids that you have "systematically observed" and you use the opinion of others who value your mothers input and opinions.

And yet, Mike Pearl has 5 very well adjusted children, and many people who have known their family that value their opinion and input.

Yet, you only place value on your opinion and your mothers friends, while dismissing theirs simply because you say so. If children can be placed into evidence and the opinions of friends can be placed into evidence, it is either admissible for both, or neither.

[formergothardite]

Since I am slow, can you pleeeeease explain how hitting a child of any age with a willow branch isn't spanking? Do you view hitting a child with plumbing line as spanking? Like I said before intent or age doens't matter. Either it is or isn't spanking and since you believe it isn't, how is it different?

ETA: I don't know about the rest of his kids, but at least one of them is living with a guy she never legally married in poverty because they guy refuses to work and she won't leave them.