Pearls' Article: Too Young To Spank

[debrand]

Inspired by hoipolli's thread about the Pearls, I decided to repost a link to the Pearls' article Too Young to Spank. Michael has tried to claim that he doesn't advocate hitting babies. I'll let the article itself settle that issue

http://nogreaterjoy.org/articles/too-young-to-spank/

I linked to the article so that the Pearls' can't claim that we are taking them out of context. They use their normal double speak in the article. The link is to a magazine article so I don't think that I have to break the link.

We have made the point here that children under three (give or take six months or so) cannot profit from corporal punishment, but we have made the point elsewhere that small children do profit from the application of the training rod. How are they different? In both cases, the child is being swatted with an instrument. There is a great deal of difference in both the severity and the number of “licks,†and also in the parents’ expectations and perspective.

and

A six-month-old throws his food bowl on the floor because he doesn’t like what is in it. This is the early stage of self-will and defiance. If the little guy gets away with it and if his parents don’t constrain him to do otherwise, then they are normalizing such behavior. Furthermore, they are allowing the seeds of defiance to grow in the child’s soul. Rebuke here would not be effective, nor would punishment. The child would not make any connection between his action and any suffering that you inflicted. If he were spanked hard enough to create significant pain, he would become so distracted with the pain and so fearful and emotionally disturbed that he could not be trained to any end. Remember, the child is simply expressing his will by dumping the food in the floor. I have had food set before me that I felt like dumping on the floor, but it would have been socially embarrassing to take that action. The child has no social consciousness, so he does whatever he feels like. Dumping it is not a great offense for a six-month-old, but he will not always be six months old, and it won’t be cute for long. It will make you downright mad when he is three years old and flings a whole plate of food into your lap.

So we watch him, knowing his propensity to selfish compulsion. When he seizes his bowl with intentions of dumping it, swat the offending hand with a little instrument (light wooden spoon, rubber spatula, flexible tubing less than a quarter inch in diameter, or any instrument that will cause an unpleasant sting without leaving any marks). As you swat the offending hand, say “No†in a normal commanding voice. The tone is more important than the word―not angry―but decisive. Children understand the temperament in your tone before they are born, and will recognize it. This swat is not punishment. Probably, it will not even cause the little guy to cry. He will be shocked and stop any action in which he is engaged. Explain to him that he is not to throw his food onto the floor. If he again makes an attempt, swat his hand again and say, no. The third time is the charm. He now knows that “No†uttered in a commanding tone, is something serious. He will not try that stunt again—at least not for this meal.

[Katiebug]

The Pearls are batshit insane and should be in jail for advocating hitting infants.

[debrand]

The Pearls are batshit insane and should be in jail for advocating hitting infants.

Sadly, there is no law against spanking young infants so no charge can be brought against them. :(

[Bloo]

If the "training swat" isn't punishment, then what is it? What purpose does it serve? If the word is what's most important, couldn't that be said without the swat? I think they just want an excuse to hit babies.

[Jezebel Duggar]

Sadly, there is no law against spanking young infants so no charge can be brought against them. :(

Well then can we just all go over there and beat them a little?

[Conuly]

Well then can we just all go over there and beat them a little?

Just so long as we're not punishing them.

[hoipolloi]

any instrument that will cause an unpleasant sting without leaving any marks

Kind of says it all, right there.

Michael & Debi Pearl are liars. Someone needs to punish them in the same way Debi recommend lying children should be punished (nogreaterjoy.org/articles/dealing-with-slick-liars/):

When our second son, Nathan, was about six years old, we were forced to face the fact that we had a son who was an incorrigible liar. It was difficult to accept because he had the sweetest, most innocent and sincere countenance. And he was smart! I think his bad habit was encouraged by his knowledge that I did not want to believe he was a liar. Consequently, he grew worse until he would actually lie when the truth would have served him better.

I realized that somewhere along the line, I had missed the opportunity to deal with him while he was still young enough to easily break the habit. After much soul-searching and many botched ideas, I finally told Nathan that I realized he was a liar, even though I couldn’t catch him red-handed in his lies. I told him that God hated lying, that I hated it, that I had failed him, and that it was very important that he not continue to be a liar. I informed him that everyday for the next seven days, I was going to give him 10 licks at noon. He was to bring me the switch and I would spank him for being a liar.

Debi Pearl: These are your own twisted, sick words. No editing, misrepresentation or fabrication. You, Debi, wrote & published this garbage.

[Bellatrix]

Just so long as we're not punishing them.

Promise, we'll only train them. Commanding tone and all...

[ilovetchotchkes]

A 6 month old does NOT throw the bowl on the floor because he's willful, a 6 month old throws the bowl on the floor for multiple reasons the biggest of which is "hey! what happens when I do this? does it fall? does the dog rush under my high chair??"

When my 2 year old tells me "NO" when I say "lets pick up your toys". That's being willful, but that's also the age, and I also dont' fucking BEAT HIM WITH A SWITCH when he does that. I merely get down to his level and say seriously "mommy needs your help now, you want to be a big boy and help mama right? " and 9 out of 10 times he grins at me and does what i've asked him to. Oh and goodness me! most of the time he, at the age of 2 and change, brings his dishes to the sink after eating. And puts his dishes away after I've washed them and he does it happily. No beating necessary! Why? I MADE IT INTO A GAME!!!!!

I really really really CANNOT fathom treating my child how the Pearls advocate treating children. I just CANNOT. SHIT, I would not treat an adult I hated in that manner, why the FUCK would I treat my son who is seriously the light of my life like that?!?!?

These people have NO FUCKING CONCEPT of child development. NONE.

[twin2]

Promise, we'll only train them. Commanding tone and all...

And we will only use 3/4' plumbing line because it will not leave any marks.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Sadly, there is no law against spanking young infants so no charge can be brought against them. :(

Depends on where you live - each country and each state have different definitions of assault and/or abuse.

In Canada, hitting an infant with plumbing line = assault with a weapon under the Criminal Code, plus it's grounds for child protection authorities to get involved.

[Conuly]

In Canada, hitting an infant with plumbing line = assault with a weapon under the Criminal Code, plus it's grounds for child protection authorities to get involved.

It's a pity the Pearls can't be prosecuted in Canada, then.

[FrauGringa]

As a former CPS caseworker (TX), any corporal punishment of an infant would merit an investigation at the very least. Corporal punishment is a sticky subject even for CPS though. It's not illegal, but certainly not encouraged either. Frustratingly, there's a fine line between what's acceptable and what's not--the fine line between what one would consider "spanking" vs. what one would considering "beating." One would also consider what the child is being punished for. Was he/she spanked once for intentionally breaking something or is he/she whooped each time she looks at her parents "funny?" As caseworkers, we were taught to pay attention to the details of bruises as well--size, location, shape, etc. Then, ladies and gentleman, we had to consider the developmental level of the child. An average five year old could make the connection between breaking the lamp and getting a spanking. Is an infant going to understand why she's being hit? Of course not! All she's going to understand is that someone caused her pain. I once had a case where (in addition to other various issues which I will not go into for now) the mother was smacking her one month old twins for fussing because "they knew what they were doing." She was no longer allowed unsupervised contact with her children.

On an even more personal level, I cannot imagine ever spanking my daughter at any age. And sure as hell not now (she's 9 months old)! I started following Free Jinger around the time she was born, and thus was introduced to the Pearls and TTUAC. Reading the part about "training" 6 month-olds made me furious (and nauseous). The other sections of the manual are just as reprehensible to me, but the part about infants hit way too close to home. It's ridiculous how the Pearls are backtracking on spanking infants when their own freaking book shows their opinion as clear as day. Many people are not critical thinkers and will follow the advice of certain authorities without blinking (i.e. fundies). Having child-rearing advice such as TTUAC available for public consumption is simply irresponsible. Yes, I know I'm preaching to the choir.

[StarrieEyedKat]

I think I've followed the Pearl's a little too much now...I could actually hear his voice while I was reading that article. I know exactly what he sounded like when he was saying "light wooden spoon, rubber spatula, flexible tubing less than a quarter inch in diameter, or any instrument that will cause an unpleasant sting without leaving any marks."

His voice haunts me. :(

[crazyforkate]

I wish the US would make some kind of law about spanking...but it will never happen, too many fundies and others out there.

[FloraDoraDolly]

When our second son, Nathan, was about six years old, we were forced to face the fact that we had a son who was an incorrigible liar. It was difficult to accept because he had the sweetest, most innocent and sincere countenance. And he was smart! I think his bad habit was encouraged by his knowledge that I did not want to believe he was a liar. Consequently, he grew worse until he would actually lie when the truth would have served him better.

I realized that somewhere along the line, I had missed the opportunity to deal with him while he was still young enough to easily break the habit. After much soul-searching and many botched ideas, I finally told Nathan that I realized he was a liar, even though I couldn’t catch him red-handed in his lies. I told him that God hated lying, that I hated it, that I had failed him, and that it was very important that he not continue to be a liar. I informed him that everyday for the next seven days, I was going to give him 10 licks at noon. He was to bring me the switch and I would spank him for being a liar.

Maybe the kid is a liar because his parents beat him all the time and lying is the only way to get out of it.

[Coconut Flan]

They have no sense. Six month olds drop everything - to see if fall. They drop bears, rattles, bowls, whatever. It's the developmental stage and proper for them. People with good sense don't put a bowl of food in front of a six month old and take their hand off it unless it's there for the child to explore which will usually end with it on the floor.

[Bloo]

So she suspected that Nathan was lying, had no proof of it whatsoever, and she told him that he was going to be beaten every day for a week based on her suspicions? That's FUCKED UP. Every time I hear something from this family, I think, "Well, this is it, at least it can't get any worse." I suppose I should just stop thinking about them.

[Maude]

All I can say is, the Pearls would not have wanted me as their child. No form of discipline ever worked for me, including being belted.

[Koala]

Kind of says it all, right there.

Michael & Debi Pearl are liars. Someone needs to punish them in the same way Debi recommend lying children should be punished (nogreaterjoy.org/articles/dealing-with-slick-liars/):

Debi Pearl: These are your own twisted, sick words. No editing, misrepresentation or fabrication. You, Debi, wrote & published this garbage.

She is a sadistic bitch. If I am reading that correctly she set a time each day (for 7 days straight) to hit her child for something she had no way to prove he did. She is fucking evil. I've heard people do the "poor Debi was beaten down by Michael" song and dance, and the next time I hear it I will point them to this. Oh and the one where she hit one of the girls for 10 days straight for cutting some wall hanging. Sadistic.Bitch.

[JMarie]

I simply cannot read this. It makes me sick to my stomach to know that there are people who take the Pearls' advice as gospel.

[FloraDoraDolly]

Of all the big names in the Quiverfull movement, I consider the Pearls by far the most dangerous. Children have DIED because their parents followed the Pearls' methods of "child training." The Pearls' influence extends beyond the small, fringe Quiverfull movement. "To Train Up A Child" has been in print since 1994 and has sold over 600,000 copies. If each of those copies represents a family with at least two children... Well, you do the math.

[Rosa]

Flora, I've personally destroyed 4 copies, so I think it's safe to say a large percentage were given as gifts and never read or were read and destroyed in horror.

[emmiedahl]

About the lying thing, I had a lying 8/9 year old that I posted in Chatter about a year ago or so. We managed to get through it without beatings. I think it was Austin who suggested the girl was lying because she knew she had been wrong and was trying to save face. I changed my reaction to the misdeeds and she stopped lying.

When an older child lies to a non-abusive parent, it may be because they know deep down inside that they fucked up. Children have pride, just like adults. That in itself is a good thing. Instead of hitting her (which would never happen anyway) I went with "Girlfriend, you know what you did. Let's just be honest and deal with it." No judgment because we all make mistakes. And she responded. I also rewarded owning-up behavior, when she admitted wrong doing at the get-go. Not with a party or anything, but I have a long-standing policy of never punishing when a person is honest about their mistake and willing to make amends.

I just thought I would put this out there in case any FJers or lurkers are dealing with the same behavior, which is very normal at the 5-10 age group. None of my children have been beaten and they are all sweeties. You don't have to be a hard-ass.

[FloraDoraDolly]

Flora, I've personally destroyed 4 copies, so I think it's safe to say a large percentage were given as gifts and never read or were read and destroyed in horror.

Good for you! Normally, I am against book burning/destruction/censorship, but I make an exception where the Pearls are concerned as well as for child pornographers.