AP: Uproar erupts over spanking advocates

Uproar erupts over spanking advocates

BAKERSFIELD – The mayor's office has been flooded with e-mails from anti-spanking advocates nationwide who are angry over a business run by a local company that offers books promoting corporal punishment.

Child Training Resources is an Internet business run out of the home of Stephen and Melanie Haymond. Besides offering books on the topic, the site also sells a plastic spanking tool called a "chastening instrument" that is guaranteed not to break.

An e-mail campaign against the business is being waged by Susan Lawrence, a Boston-based opponent of spanking. She has encouraged people to send protest letters to the mayor's office as well as banks and businesses associated with Child Training Resources.

The Haymonds drew criticism in 1996 when they sent materials for a spanking device to local churches, as well as to the Kern Child Abuse Prevention Council/Haven Counseling Center.

Associated Press

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051226/news_1n26region.html (scroll down)

A spanking implement that is guaranteed not to break.

Is their home a nice, damp cave, I wonder??

We continued with the behavior that got us bent over a chair so what good is it?

I think we have some kids who need disciplined better at home so when they go to school they have more respect for people.

Did George and Barbara followed this? Did ma and pa O'Reilly? what about the other religious fanatics?

enough.:evilgrin:

What a lovely peek at what goes on inside the minds of fundies.

be in the toilet right now.

I abhor violence but I think even I would make an exception in this case.

Try our new light weight gloves that give just the right amount of attention getting, but without those embarrassing bruises!

And for really tough love try our new aluminum wiffle bat.

And remember Jesus loves you.

Who would Jesus beat?

And these sick fucks think atheists are morally challenged?

Spanking has nothing to do with faith, it has to do with ideals people have on raising theit kids.

And wasn't spare the rod spoil the child a jewish thing anyway?

I assumed there was some sort of religious connection.

Must be one of those interpretation issues.

and bully for you. Beating obedience into one's kids seems pretty inconsistent with my take on spirituality, too.

But it is a BIG justification for some of these big time corporal punishment blowhards.

any more than gay bashing does.

I am not familiar of Jewish leaders advocating spanking their kids quoting from the bible; we have all heard from Christians "leaders" who do.

Here are some notable takes on it:

According to Jewish law, parents are not permitted to cause any injury to their children. We are also instructed not to use corporal punishment on an older child because this violates the prohibition "do not put a stumbling block before the blind" (Leviticus 19:14), which forbids us from putting someone into a situation where he would be tempted to sin. Since an older child might well be tempted to strike back or curse his parents if subjected to corporal punishment, we are forbidden from putting him in that situation.

The Talmud teaches us that a father who strikes an older son is to be excommunicated. Jewish legal authorities inform us that while this law only mentions an older child, it is actually true of any child who might possibly react improperly.

http://www.corpun.com/usd00012.htm

A history of spanking from jews to pagans and more:
http://www.aolff.org/sfhistory.htm


Also of note - spare the rod spoil the child is not in the bible.

Here is an interesting take on the christian side from the above link though:

Add to this the conflict of interest many Christians are faced with when their young children accept Jesus—making them brothers and sisters in faith. The current Christian teachings about spankings create parents who are told to be one way to their children and another way to their fellow believers. When a child becomes a fellow believer what is the parent to do? Continue “beating the devil out of the child” who is already redeemed by the blood of the Lamb? Or abandon a practice they have been told is required by God for parenting in a Biblical way?

except, the spare the rod is from Proverbs, 12: 24

"He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him early."

Of course, Proverbs is a collection of philosophical observations some based on the mood of the author while uttering different musings.

is from victorian area :)

who advocates 'correcting' babies frequently before the age of one, to remove their 'rebellious spirit'.


Personally, I think spanking is bad parenting at best, and when you're talking about what some of these fundies get into with their fetishistic 'rods' and 'implements', IMHO you're wandering well into child abuse territory.

But infants.. :puke: I just can't believe some assholes (drunk with "God's Love" at the same time, too) can be so vile.

I agree completely.

Like I said, I think they enjoy it just a little too much.

It this the nut you were speaking of? The Pearls? They are disgusting and will come to your house to beat your infant for you if you are too weak. Take a look at the pictures.

www.nogreaterjoy.org

That is beyond sick. IMO, that is pure sin embodied!!!!

sounds like sadism and brutality to me, with perhaps fetishism thrown in?

enjoy it a little too much, don't they?

And is there more than one reason these kids are kept at home, home-schooled, and out of sight most of the time?

On brass knuckles and blackjacks. Your children *will* honor their parents.

And for those children who are godless and disobedient...
Coming Soon! Ask about our holy bible punishment cabinets.

The products seem to sell so much faster when people get excited about them!!!

Isn't that cabinet a little drafty for the kiddies?:evilgrin:

can be considered "loving correction".


Affordable - buy one for kitchen, bedroom, car - wherever!

Of course, because it would be a shame if you had to walk to another room to find your weapon. :eyes:


Isn't it amazing how what would be considered battery, a crime, when perpetrated against another adult, is considered "loving correction" when foisted upon a defenseless child? :scared:

that still allows the "sting" but without leaving the marks of abuse. That way those who hit their children with sticks can avoid charges. If you're gonna promote hitting children - go whole hog!

to re-visit the fact that the godly Dr. James Dobson advocates beating children "until they cry real tears."

Dobson advocates the spanking of children from 15-18 months to eight years old. According to Dobson, "pain is a marvelous purifier." (Dare to Discipline, p.6) He argues that "it is not necessary to beat the child into submission; a little bit of pain goes a long way for a young child. However, the spanking should be of sufficient magnitude to cause the child to cry genuinely." (Ibid., p.7.)

In The Strong-Willed Child (p.73), Dobson writes: "Some strong-willed children absolutely demand to be spanked, and their wishes should be granted." As for the magnitude of the spanking, he argues that "two or three stinging strokes on the legs or buttocks with a switch are usually sufficient to emphasize the point, 'You must obey me.'" (The Strong-Willed Child, pp. 53-4.)

Dobson directly connects parental authority to social authority: "By learning to yield to the loving authority...of his parents, a child learns to submit to other forms of authority which will confront him later in his life -- his teachers, school principal, police, neighbors and employers." (The Strong-Willed Child, p. 235.)

He frequently portrays the child as the natural enemy of the parent and emphasizes that it is necessary to punish the child to uphold parental authority. "When you are defiantly challenged, win decisively." (Dare to Discipline, p. 36.)

In The Strong-Willed Child, Dobson draws a strong analogy between child rearing and dog rearing. He tells a story in which the family dog refuses to leave his resting place on the lid of the toilet seat. According to Dobson, a "vicious fight" between him and the dog resulted in which he "fought him up one wall and down the other, with both of us scratching and clawing and growling and swinging the belt ." He concludes that "just as surely as a dog will occasionally challenge the authority of his leaders, so will a little child--only more so." (emphasis Dobson)

To deal with crying, Dobson recommends: "Real crying usually lasts two minutes or less but may continue for five. After that point, the child is merely complaining, and the change can be recognized in the tone and intensity of his voice. I would require him to stop the protest crying, usually by offering him a little more of whatever caused the original tears." <2>
http://johnsoncity.blogspot.com

In his best-selling book, The Strong-Willed Child, child-rearing author James Dobson describes how he abused his family's pet dachshund, Siggie:
"Please don't misunderstand me. Siggie is a member of our family and we love him dearly. And despite his anarchistic nature, I have finally taught him to obey a few simple commands. However, we had some classic battles before he reluctantly yielded to my authority.
"The greatest confrontation occurred a few years ago when I had been in Miami for a three-day conference. I returned to observe that Siggie had become boss of the house while I was gone. But I didn't realize until later that evening just how strongly he felt about his new position as Captain.
"At eleven o'clock that night, I told Siggie to go get into his bed, which is a permanent enclosure in the family room. For six years I had given him that order at the end of each day, and for six years Siggie had obeyed.
"On this occasion, however, he refused to budge. You see, he was in the bathroom, seated comfortably on the furry lid of the toilet seat. That is his favorite spot in the house, because it allows him to bask in the warmth of a nearby electric heater. . . "
One of the greatest "secrets" of nonpunitive parenting (or pet-keeping) is "don't sweat the small stuff." If the dog is comfortable sitting on the toilet seat by the heater, why not let him sit there (so long as no one has to use the toilet at that particular moment)? Of course, for a neurotically-rigid bully like James Dobson, sweating each and every little trivial, easily-avoidable non-issue and turning it into a battle of wills is the pure essense of what child discipline is supposed to be all about.
"When I told Sigmund to leave his warm seat and go to bed, he flattened his ears and slowly turned his head toward me. He deliberately braced himself by placing one paw on the edge of the furry lid, then hunched his shoulders, raised his lips to reveal the molars on both sides, and uttered his most threatening growl. That was Siggie's way of saying. "Get lost!"
"I had seen this defiant mood before, and knew there was only one way to deal with it. The ONLY way to make Siggie obey is to threaten him with destruction. Nothing else works. I turned and went to my closet and got a small belt to help me 'reason' with Mr. Freud."
What Dobson never explains to his readers is WHY it was so essential that the dog sleep where Dobson wanted him to sleep instead of where the dog wanted to sleep. Dobson is behaving like a toddler who throws a violent tantrum if his "bedtime ritual" isn't adhered to down to the slightest detail. Making Siggie go to sleep on command where and when Dobson wants him to has been part of this overgrown toddler's bedtime ritual for six years. Now, Siggie is interfering with a small detail of this bedtime ritual of Dobson's by wanting to sleep somewhere else which is warmer and more comfortable. So Dobson, true to his infantile level of emotional maturity, throws a violent tantrum:
"What developed next is impossible to describe. That tiny dog and I had the most vicious fight ever staged between man and beast. I fought him up one wall and down the other, with both of us scratching and clawing and growling and swinging the belt. I am embarrassed by the memory of the entire scene. Inch by inch I moved him toward the family room and his bed. As a final desperate maneuver, Siggie backed into the corner for one last snarling stand. I eventually got him to bed, only because I outweighed him 200 to 12!"
This is one sick puppy, and I don't mean the dog, either. Dobson is OBSESSED with control. I suspect that this stems from the punitive upbringing he endured as a young child (and which he now praises, with unintended irony, for making him what he is today). Now that he is a grownup, and too old to spank, he is determined to get everything HIS way, by golly! He is a 200 pound, verbally articulate version of the "strong-willed" toddlers whom he always exhorts parents to whip into submission "with a belt or switch" because "pain is a marvelous purifier." Dobson is walking proof of how just how badly a spanked child can turn out. The fact that parents like this exist in the world is an excellent argument for why all forms of corporal punishment should be abolished forthwith.
Just in case the more slow-witted among his readers fail to grasp the obvious parallel between his relationship with his dog and the type of parenting advice the man as become rich and famous by dispensing, Dobson then lays it explicitly on the line:
"But this is not a book about the discipline of dogs; there is an important moral to my story that is highly relevant to the world of children. JUST AS SURELY AS A DOG WILL OCCASIONALLY CHALLENGE THE AUTHORITY OF HIS LEADERS, SO WILL A LITTLE CHILD -- ONLY MORE SO." (emphasis Dobson's)
Dobson says that his Focus On the Family organization is engaged in a "new civil war" in which what he calls the "forces of Light" (child hitters, homophobes, Operation Rescue, would-be censors, etc.) are pitted against the "forces of Darkness" (antispankers, gays and lesbians, Planned Parenthood, free speech advocates, etc.). This man treats dog ownership as a war, he treats childrearing as a war; indeed he appears to see his entire life as a war.
Dobson even views some crying babies as "little dictators" engaged in a bid to control and enslave their parents, and advises parents not to let the child "win" by picking up the child and soothing it. He warns that:
"t is possible to create a fussy, demanding baby by rushing to pick him up every time he utters a whimper or sigh. Infants are fully capable of learning to manipulate their parents through a process called reinforcement, whereby any behavior that produces a pleasant result will tend to recur. Thus, a healthy baby can keep his mother hopping around his nursery twelve hours a day (or night) by simply forcing air past his sandpaper larynx."
This is a classic example of a neurotic projecting his own unquenchable symbolic cravings onto babies who are simply trying to get their needs met in the only way available to them, by crying. Indeed, Dobson himself is an excellent example of how babies turn out whose needs are not met. Because HE was not picked up when he cried as a baby, he finds crying babies intolerable. He perceivess THEIR needs as insatiable and urges parents to just ignore them and let them cry themselves into silent, exhausted despair. In fact, the genuine emotional needs of babies, unlike the symbolic pseudoneeds of neurotics, are not bottomless pits which can never be filled. Babies whose needs are met are LESS demanding and troublesome than babies whose needs aren't met, not more so. For proof, one need only observe cultures in which babies are carried everywhere next to the mothers's body in slings and their needs for feeding or attention instantly gratified on demand. According to Dobson, these should be incredibly "spoiled" cranky babies, but they aren't. (For more about this, see Jean Liedloff's excellent book, The Continuum Concept).
Dobson's parenting style CREATES the sorts of problems for which he then claims to offer the only solution. He bullies children, and when they resist his oppressive, degrading treatment, he uses their "defiance" to further justify his behavior. He sees the family as "a heirarchy of strength" in which the one with the greatest physical might and the strongest will prevails. His books are full of military metaphors in which children "marshall their forces," and "launch" every "weapon" in their "arsenals,"while parents are advised to "draw a line in the sand" and to "win and win decisively" whenever a child "sticks their big hairy toe over the line" because "the child has made it clear that he is looking for a fight and his parents would be wise not to disappoint him. "In fact, it is Dobson himself who starts out looking for a fight by his dysfunctional need for total control, (even to the point of dictating precisely where and when his dog sleeps at night). Yet, whenever his children can't stand it anymore and mount a valiant, hopeless bid to resist his domestic tyranny, he blames it on the children, claiming that:
"Perhaps this tendency toward self-will is the essence of 'original sin' which has infiltrated the human family. It certainly explains why I place such stress on the proper response to willful defiance during childhood, for that rebellion can plant the seeds of personal disaster."
The "rebellion" which Dobson blames on the child's original sinfulness is actually just the flip side of Dobson's own authoritarian, Parent-Wins-Child-Loses, control-obsessed approach to parenting. Totalitarian oppressive behavior by dictators breeds insurgency - coercive bullying behavior by parents breeds "rebellion. " Dobson CREATES this sort of behavior in children, and then uses it as proof that still more authoritarian bullying is the only solution to the "rebellion" by "strong-willed" children which his tyranny provoked in the first place.
Dobson uses the same weapons which third world dictators utilize to break the wills of pro-democracy dissidents: pain and fear. The major difference is that when dictators torture and intimidate anyone who resists THEIR tyranny, THEY don't claim to be doing it for their victims' own good as an act of love. Dictators torture and intimidate because doing so meets THEIR needs. So does James Dobson.

also bragged about how he beat his dog. I wonder how he'd feel with a "chastening tool" shoved up his poop chute

will be quite appropriate

(I think these people would benefit greatly from a BIG helping of their own medicine.)

we used to counsel parents not to use an instrument to discipline. They tend to leave marks or bruises (injury), and a parent crosses the line, many times, into physical abuse when that parent injures the child. In other words, physical abuse can be substantiated, and the social worker who investigates will not only be called upon to substantiate the abuse, but authorities will have to weigh whether or not the child has to be taken into protective custody. If the child is taken into protective custody, then starts a miserable, horrifying court process.

We used to counsel, that if a parent felt compelled to use physical discipline, to spank over clothing (hopefully over a diaper), using an open palm.

I'm no lawyer, and no longer in mental health/social-services, but, to me, spanking is never worth it. It simply teaches the child that violence, although perhaps mild, is o.k., and it rarely stops the behavior in question.

Parents who use physical discipline should investigate the law before they do so.

Please, no flames. It is just my two cents' worth.

California is VERY strict when it comes to enforcing those laws; they are strictly enforced, I should say. This is not the place for them to be selling this device.

I wonder if the device is being discussed in certain hardright fundamentalist churches; I have a neighbor that allegedly spanked her child using a wooden spoon.

are why they include this waiver in their advert:

I do not know if this will work when the lawsuits come in.

BMUS, remember when you and I were just recently having a conversation on hardright religious people. I'm hearing this "I must use physcial discipline" stuff from my very conservative Dobson-following neighbors quite a bit lately. Wonder what is up?

Just an ol' social worker's opinion .... using an instrument = trouble (maybe now, maybe later, but trouble).

By the way, I can understand a slight swat on the buttocks over clothing once or twice, and I realize that Dads and Moms have to escort the child to a time-out area - these things are within the realm of understanding.

That's no doubt the reason behind counseling parents about HOW to spank if they must.

That's light years away from what these people are advocating.

"Biblical rod" ???

How much you want a bet the kids aren't the only ones getting hit?

Uh-oh. Bad Maat. When will I learn to keep my piehole shut?

Maybe I will have to have that husband ... just joking.

Dr. Phool was only half joking about the wife discipling devices.

These people can convince themselves that their god wants them to do a lot of things, not just spank children.

See how easy it is to manipulate them?

If you can convince a mother that god wants her to hit her child, what couldn't you convince her of?

There is one common denominator I saw in all the various cases of child abuse - a narcissistic control freak. I could count on it.

That guy just says 'control freak' all over (the guy marketing the chastening instrument or whatever).

that than you ever wanted to.

Kudos to you for sticking with it.

And thanks for your efforts to educate people.

Onward!

told me they had corporal punishment. the they used a paddle. they didnt believe using the hand, the hand was to love the child so they taught and felt strongly to use a tool to spank. i told him, that if i was going to spank a child i was going to use my hand, because i was going to feel the pain, right along with my child.

i dont spank

i told the head dude, if child earned a spanking no one did it but me. i also knew neither of my children would do anything to earn a spanking, and of course neither did

over the time in that school, i heard many parents refer to spanking children with something. it was bothersome

i dont see it as abuse, as many on this board advocate. i think other parenting tools for discipline and teaching respect and guiding behavior take more time and work and consistancy, yet..... are by far more effective. teaching the child to make the decision for good choices in life not out of fear, but because that is the best choice for them.

i dont see spanking as abuse. i dont want a law outlawing spanking, as has been suggested here on this board, and in areas of the country. but i also dont think it is as effective either and can become abusive.

that even when you spank the child you still love him.

Then there are already stories from the other side.

I knew a man whose wife was suffering from one of those degenerative disease, ALS, not sure. And one day his young son was really misbehave and he used an open hand on him - don't remember whether was on the face or on an arm.

Well, the kid had those marks when he went to school. Both children were taken from them and put in foster homes for several years and it took him forever to get them back after supervised visits and so forth. The father was/is really sensitive man who was going through losing a job and caring for his wife. It was a momentary lapse but, as stated above, this was in California.

Another story, in Florida, a couple was going through a divorce. The daughter in law came to the grandfather and wanted a million dollars (he had them) otherwise he would not see the granddaughters. She went to the authorities claiming that the father abused the daughters. They actually brought experts to prove that a certain condition in the rectum was not a result of sexual abuse.

The grandfather than found out that the the mother simply abandoned the girls that were then taken into social service and he managed to get custody of them. For the next several years he spent million of dollars to finally get his son out of prison. I think that during that time there were some stories about over zealots social workers. And, as we all know, there are all the stories about sexual abuses in day care centers that were found to be pure inventions.

I realize that social workers are over worked but it would be nice to look at every case separately.

I think that many of us, older than, say, 30, were spanked by our parents - open hand on our buttocks over clothes - and came out OK.

But I shudder to think of using anything other than an open hand on bare buttocks.

There's more to that story than what you have . Even in California, abused kids are repeated returned to their homes, only to be killed by the abusive parent.

I was spanked by my parents - probably less than my brothers and sister - and none of us turned out ok. I'm not going to have children because I'm afraid I'll do to them what was done to me and my siblings.

People that hit only seek out reasons why to hit. Those of us that don't hit usually know much more about child development, brain function etc and learn that when a child does something that some people might refer to as "spankworthy" it is really the adult in charge at fault. Example: My neighbor hits her 2 year old for running off the lawn. She thinks he needs to understand he can't leave the lawn. I think she is an idiot who does not know she should keep her child safe. My question is this: Why in the world would anyone let a 2 yr old alone on the front lawn by a somewhat busy street? She is remiss in not tending to her child. The child is not at fault. My favorite is when they hit because the child is hitting. OH REALLY???? Wonder where the child learned that? Shocking.

People that hit do take glee in hitting. There was a "parenting" website for Christians that pretty much had threads on how to hit without leaving marks, or how to hide the implements so that social services could not identify them as spanking/hitting tools. One potential mother (waiting for overseas adoption to be final) couldn't wait. She had explained how she and her husband had a closet all ready, the tools for hitting all in place and why adoption outside the US was preferable because the courts won't bother with you and follow ups.

Sick, sick people. :puke:

using his booming voice to threaten a three foot child with physical violence if the boy didn't obey.

It sounds like another shock and awe campaign against a third world nation who could never harm us by the bushbots.

vocal) me, immediately after I got done phoning CPS.

My grammie taught me, "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all."

:rofl:

I opened this post thinking that someone was advocating spanking advocates. I can imagine all the advocates standing in a big cicle spanking each other. Why not "spanking advocates cause uproar"? Ah well.

I'm an advocate of not hitting kids with "devices." If you really want to spank a child, you should be able to feel it yourself.

"These will be a god-send in my dominatrix business. I intend to order a few for each of the dominatrixes in my stable of girls. The girls need something that doesn't leave many marks so wives will be a lot less likely to see bruises on there hubbies bare butts." :evilgrin::rofl:

appear to have no scruples.

I wouldn't compare what consenting adults do for pleasure to beating children.

many reichwing fundies, though. I notice that it doesn't stop some of them (like the mormons) from profiting from activities and items with which they disagree.

Hypocrisy.

A fundie family value.

by posting pix of the girls using them.

Welp, here it is.



# Flexible - produces the right amount of sting without injury!
# Unbreakable - will last a lifetime! *
# Convenient - fits easily into purse or travel bag!
# Affordable - buy one for kitchen, bedroom, car - wherever!
# Guaranteed - satisfaction or money back

http://biblicalchildtraining.com/order.htm

Looks like something that "adult" stores might stock. :spank:

Hey, that might actually be a good marketing strategy for Stephen and Melanie! :think:

How about Sesame Street characters?

Last year, NAMI got very upset and made a lot of noise over a $75 teddy bear in a straight jacket that came with a card that read: "“Can’t Eat, Can’t Sleep, My Heart’s Racing. Diagnosis – Crazy for You!"

The unintended consequences of that were that sales of the bear skyrocketed. BBC picked up the story and people were orderinhg those things right and left til they all sold out. Now they're going on e-bay for like $200-$300.

http://shop.store.yahoo.com/vtbear/crazyforyou2.html

Now, who's going to pay 75 bucks for a 15" stuffed bear? That thing would have died on the vine, and you'd have never heard of it, had it not been for NAMI.

Who gets off on spanking kids?
Is it okay because Jeebus told them to?

make it a a cause celebre'

As it is, it's a bunch of obscure fundies. The more publicity they gain- positive or negative, has the potential to increase their profits, grow their sick business and encourage imitators.

That's the tricky thing about campaigns like this.

(NAMI did get the bear off the market, btw- but not before it made tons of money).

And the people who are selling the "Biblical rod" are doing it for profit.

The only way to fight fundamentalism is education.

In this case, that starts with exposing the abusers.

all the while screaming like a bloody banshee and she now wonders why we "kids" are all so distant...

Nothing really new.

I could remember story from parents talking about how their mom used to hit them with a broom handle. There is this PC craze about how parents should never use corporal punishment. It worked for the past 500 years, why change it now?

Have you been smacked with a broom handle by your parents? Had an electric cord used on you like a switch?

As the kids get bigger, so do the weapons, and the scars.

they hit ma and pa in return and then we read about elder abuse

This can be a vicious cycle. I don't have a problem with an occasional swat with an open hand on the kid's clothed bottom when s/he clearly can sees where the line is drawn and is testing it, but not as means to discipline.

If the only way parents can rear their kids is with fear, that something is very very wrong there. A family counseling is needed before things get out of hand.

Infants!

"The device is sold along with baby-torture manuals such as "To Train Up a Child" and "Shepherding a Child's Heart" that recommend whipping infants under 1 year of age."

From "To Train Up a Child"

Here are some references:

1) The Pearls recommend whipping infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They describe whipping their own 4 month old daughter (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 indifferent, 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 year old so hard "a karate chop like wheeze came from somewhere deep inside."

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

http://stoptherod.net/ttuac.html

This ain't spanking.

Adults "touching in an unwanted manner" any other person is the legal definition of "assalt and battery", and is a jailable offense in every state.
When children are involved, "spanking" can't leave a mark that lasts, and is evaluated on a case by case basis when child protective services is alerted by the police or courts.
So how do they get away with it? They lie and deceive the authorities, and are politically powerful, like when Bush the lesser got through cocaine possession and drunk driving charges.
We have an aristocracy in this country, just not all are extremely wealthy.

and were rightfully deemed to be crap in the past 150 years. I don't think I need to give you examples.

Please tell me where you live so I can call Social Services.

Not in the abusive way, but in the way parents have been doing for generations.

not worth it

Some of those "brats" you're referring to probably come from some of these same families taking their 'spare the rod' parenting advice from Dobson, et al.

Inquiring minds want to know. You DID write approvingly of that particular method, you know.

Ah, and the address. Don't forget the address.

Hitting and your signature line do not go together.

You don't even have kids and already know they will warrent hitting? That is the craziest thing I have ever heard. So these children, that aren't even here, are already pegged as bad and need for you to hit them? Talk about horrible parenting....even before there is parenting.

See..it is a person like this that will always take glee in hitting and before they are even here this person has already decided they need to be hit. Sick!

I don't think producing another generation of people who think that the way to "win" an argument is to physically "discipline" or "overpower" the opponent into submission is exactly winning.

Of course, having spent 23 years working with the general population's children, I've seen way too much of the following:

*spanking that crosses the line when a parent is angry; many don't think to avoid hitting when they are angry, and their anger carries them beyond the boundaries of "spank" and into "beat/abuse."

*kids who are bullies, because they've learned that the bully has all the power.

*kids whose mentality is such that the more they are "punished" the more rebellious they become; they develop into incorrigible, uncontrollable teens who are at risk of dropping out, incarceration, etc.

*some of the above kids turn right around and abuse their parents when they are big enough to; and they carry that pattern of abuse into other adult relationships, and into their parenting roles.

Personally, I've never equated respect with fear.

That is why we have overly agressive people. The only thing that comes out of hitting a kid is agression, anger, and the lesson that hitting does work and she be employed whenever possible.

Chastening instrument? And a book to accompany it?
There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with these sickos.

I would never use the board. If you want to cause a change in a behavior, especially if it is not your own child, you develop a open, trusting relationship with the child. The relationship will allow the child to understand that there are limits in which a child (and adult) must live and if one moves beyond the limits consequences are incurred. These consequences can be quite severe and none of them require any physical punishment. My children, I believe, are well behaved and they have received nothing more than the usual "time outs," the "look," a conversation on expecatations and/or an occasional slap on wrist or hiney; nothing that would require the "rod." How stupid!

A child's brain is not developed enough to really understand, and benefit, from punishment until at least 3-4 years old, in my humble opinion.

These people are seriously twisted and hatefilled.

And my hubby wants to get along, and won't let me advise them.

I think I did warn them about things once, having been a social worker for 7 years; it clearly didn't sink in.

On edit:
Whoa. I just read the whole thing. I was wondering when somebody was going to go to jail, should I say 'prison.' Somebody did.

Looks like children were taken into protective custody over this.

We have had a couple of tragedies in California - e.g. when a Father beat a two-year-old to death for not 'obeying' him, and understanding the punishment.

Unbelievably disgusting.

to prison in your neighbor's mailbox...anonymously, of course?

I get the impression people who would do something like this to their children would be less than appreciative of outsiders commenting on their actions.

Good idea - the mailbox idea.

the "device".

That is just sick.

:eyes:

Thank god I live in the Bay area now.

total obedience? Those kids follow. Follow into drugs, crime etc. You want your kids to have some independence and the ability to think for themselves. We let our kids debate us. If they can out debate us they win. Just like in the real world. This happened about 12 years ago but still a good story:

Son is 5 and his bedtime is 8:00 (no wavering, and no problem since we are all good sleepers). It is summer and he is out playing. Dad calls him in at 7:30 for his bath. Son says, "if I take a shower I can be done quick and still make bed at 8 and can play for another 15 minutes". Dad says something like, "but you don't like showers". Son says something like, "I didn't know they saved time......." This went on for 15 minutes until dad said, "OK it is 7:45 so take a shower and get in bed". We laughed. Son says, "next time get me in earlier so I can argue better". See no hitting and in fact a good lesson and laugh for everyone. If this had been a conversation in a hitting house he would have been hit right off and a pleasant/funny family incident would not have occured and he would not have honed his debate skills and time management.

I think that different discipline styles set up kids to stay in their own class system and that's one reason why there's not better class mobility. Authoritarian and fear-based discipline teaches kids to react without thinking so they can't problem-solve and they can't lead.

children. they are so fearful, have so little trust, in the children, in themselves, ultimately in god, that they have to put such restrictions. blank out their mind to feed them stories that make no sense,........

they are afraid of the free thinking mind

and we do it just like. i sit in amazement of both kids, but especially the oldest. totally easy. but i am respectful, the boss, but respectful to my children. and have told them, i expect that same respect. i wouldnt take it from a stranger, certainly wont from my children. also, i have shown them, the more i trust, the more they receive in so many areas. nah, it is just too easy when they know, it is not about controlling them, or trying to make them into something they are not. they feel respect. and if they feel that respect, children really are easy. they also learn how to respect themselves with this, and that allows them to make good choices

now, i think it was you that said above, parents get glee from hittin. my parents used a belt. seldom on me. i was a good easy child, and i really didnt want the belt. and they loved me, and respected me, and were damn good parents that did not get glee in hurting us. so no..... i dont think a lot of parents get glee in hurting kids.

I'm sure some do. I doubt my parents did and I don't really blame them - it's how they were raised, too, but it messes people up and it doesn't work anyway.

i would rather have settled inthe bay though, instead of the panhandle of texas

I went to St. Frances for grade school, Thompson Jr. High and then West High.

i was born in arizona. and i hate the heat. my ideal is seattle. i lived in reno for a while, loved it. just was having too much fun and had to move closer to parents so i would behave again, lol. was on my way out of here and married a darn texan

Our house was right behind Thompson so we could hop the fence to get to school. Sometimes, me and my friend would run our horses on the field on the weekends.

the fence of the field, jump the fence and hit the convenience store to stock up on candy, to eat during class. those were the days. i was all the way at stockdale. gosh it has been a lot of years. you.... are a youngin

that is cool. thanks for sharing.

Most people I know now didn't have "fog days" when they were kids.

if they really want to be spanked, that is:evilgrin: