Wendy decided to read “To Train Up A Child”, by Michael and Debi Pearl and post her comments. I have gathered them here with her permission. It’s a good thing I did, as those threads were lost in a board crash. For more from the forum, see the Gentle Christian Mothers Forum page.
With proper training, discipline can be reduced to 5% of what many now practice.
He’s confusing the words discipline with punishment. We know that discipline = to teach, so I hope parents do it more than 5% of the time!
These truths are not new, deep insights from the professional world of research, rather, the same principles the Amish use to train their stubborn mules, the same technique God uses to train his children.
MY CHILD IS NOT A MULE! (yep, I’m shouting) The whole foundation of this book is behaviorism, but we’re talking about children, not animals.
SWITCH YOUR KIDS – Chapter 1
She doesn’t hope to conquer their wills
God doesn’t conquer our wills, rather he gave us a free will to exercise.
My children want to please me. They try so hard to do everything I say.
Do we want to raise our children to be people pleasers?
Again behavior modification
reinforce submission of the will
Men in the military are adults – they choose to join up & follow orders.
Just think of the relief it would be if by one command you could gain the absolute, silent, concentrated attention of all your children.
I think this is why the Pearls are so popular with large families. It’s much easier than AP – where you would tailor your discipline to fit each child’s temperament, age, situation, etc.
instant, unquestioning obedience.
Good in war, not in life.
Once again, animal training, not a child. Also, you don’t whip a horse to get it to *stop*.
TRAINING NOT TO TOUCH
Remember, you are not disciplining, you are training.
He says this a lot. I think by changing the terminology in your mind, it makes the action more acceptable. Substitute “spanking” everywhere he says “training” and more people would reject their teachings.
PLANT YOUR TREE IN THE MIDST OF THE GARDEN
Most children can be brought into complete and joyous subjection in just three days.
Is this a good thing?
If nothing else, training will result in saving you time
This plays again to parental convenience – why it would sound good to a large family.
OBEDIENCE TRAINING–BITING BABIES
Why is physical pain the only way a child will learn? If a child bites while nursing, stop nursing. Let them scream, then try again. Another bite, another unlatching. Eventually, they learn.
COME WHEN I CALL YOU
The parent, having assured himself of the child’s understanding, once again sets up the situation and calls the child.
Just *how* do you know you have the child’s understanding? This is talking about a 10-12 mo old.
Thereafter, until the child leaves home, he is expected to drop everything and come upon the first call.
There’s something wrong with this, but I can’t name it. It’s certainly disrespectful at the least. But I don’t think respecting your child is one of the Pearls’ concerns.
NEVER TOO YOUNG TO TRAIN
The battle for control has begun
this self-centered demand
This example is talking about a newborn! I don’t believe an infant is capable of such manipulation.
Crying because of genuine physical need is simply the infant’s only voice to the outside world; but crying in order to manipulate the adults into constant servitude should never be rewarded.
But how do you know for sure which it is? You can’t *see* when a child needs to be held. He even says in the first paragraph
The child needs holding, loving and lots of attention,
STEPS TO OBEDIENCE
At four months she was too unknowing to be punished for disobedience.
But she can still be hit with a switch? It’s just semantics.
The thought of further spankings was disconcerting
Really?!? Why, Mr. Pearl??
TRAINING THE ORNERY AMISH BOY
Clearly, the lines were drawn. The battle was in array.
So, children are the enemy? Parenting is warfare?
Either the father would confirm that this one-year-old could rule his parents or the parents would confirm their authority. Everyone’s happiness was at stake, as well as the soul of the child.
BE ASSURED OF TWO THINGS
If parents carefully and consistently train up a child, his or her performance will be as consistently satisfying as that rendered by a well trained seeing-eye dog.
The child’s *performance*? Yes, I think with this parenting style, a child will learn to stuff their feelings & put on a good show for their parents, in order to avoid pain. But what’s being internalized?
Behold the Second Woe! – Chapter 2
What is the driving force in this child, and how can it be conquered?
Why should it be conquered at all? And by the parents?
Chapter 3 – Parental Anger
I Made A Child That I Don’t Like
By taking control and teaching them to control their emotions and to instantly obey, the child will be cheerful and pleasant.
Happy is the only acceptable emotion?
Chapter 5 – The Rod
I Love My Baby Too Much To Spank Him
Why does this always seem to be what pro-spankers think the #1 reason for non-spankers is? It’s the first objection in Tripp’s book too. Maybe some of you mamas are more gentle minded than I am, but when I am frustrated or angry with my ds, it’s easy to think of spanking & my love for him has nothing to do with it.
I observed a child possessed of continual discontent. His mother was vainly trying to elicit obedience to a simple command. He was miserable, constantly complaining, whining and angry. The mother, made miserable by the little tyrant’s rebellious antics, was ill-tempered toward him. But she continued to plead with him as if she were trying to remember what it was she heard about “positive affirmation” and not “stifling his personal expression.”
As an objective observer, concerned for the child’s happiness and well being, I said to the mother, “Why don’t you give him a spanking and make him happy?” The shocked mother, replied, “Oh, he will grow out of it. It’s just a stage he is going through.”
Sounds to me like the child is hungry or tired, that’s all. And the mom is frustrated.
“I love my child too much to spank him.” The parent who responds thus does not understand: 1) the authority of God’s word, 2) the nature of love, 3) his (or her) own feelings, 4) the character of God, or, 5) the needs of the child.
I have a hard time rebutting this following section because all his points are based on the assumption that those who don’t spank are “emotionally weak”.
God Spanks His Children
Those who out of a magnanimous sense of righteousness choose not to use the rod are, by inference, condemning God. “For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons (Heb. 12:6-8).”
Then it says He chastens us “for our own profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness (Heb. 12:10).” A most profound statement! God does not have any sons who escape chastisement–“all are partakers.” And, did He stop loving those whom he chastened? Quite the contrary, love was His motivation for the “spanking.” Only through chastisement, could His sons fully partake of His holiness. He does it “for our own profit.”
“No chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous… (Heb. 12:11).” God’s chastisement is a painful “whipping.” Our “fathers of the flesh… chastened us after their own pleasure… (12: 9, 10).” The Scripture not only condones physical “scourging,” but promotes it as a means to holiness–when ministered for the son’s “profit.”
The chastisement is represented as a sure sign of love: “for whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth. ” If there is no chastisement, it is not only an indication of not being loved, but of being a “bastard” So we see that out of the very love of God springs chastisement. Thus, our original passage in Prov. 13:24, “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. “
If God’s love is expressed by the “whippings” He gives, then can we not love our children enough to chasten them unto holiness? I have heard a rebellious teenager say, “If they only loved me enough to whip me.”
Recently, a mother told us that after cracking down on her children with a consistent use of the rod, one child thanked God for making his Mama sweeter. The increased spankings had reduced disobedience, causing the child to be more in harmony with his mother. He interpreted this to be a sweeter mother.
But how does God “spank” us? It’s not literal. There’s no giant hand that appears out of heaven to come down & swat us on the backside. God may use our circumstances, etc. to discipline us, but isn’t that like what we talk about in manipulating the environment of the child?
(Also let’s keep in mind that the word translated “chasten” is also translated as “correct” and it means “verbal correction” or the idea of “come let us reason together.” –by Crystal Author of Biblical Parenting http://www.aolff.org)
5. Understanding The Needs Of The Child
SUMMARY: “They go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies (Psalm 58:3).” The infant, through natural drives for food, cuddling and bodily comfort, soon learns that by falsely representing his need he can gain excessive indulgences.
I guess he’s interpreting this verse to say that a newborn can deceive & be manipulative.
Nevertheless, infants do lie.
I don’t get it. Certainly, this is “assigning negative intent”. How do you interpret this verse?
The rod is your divine enforcer.
He hasn’t made the case for me that physical pain is the only way a child can learn.
Understand, we are not suggesting that a child can be trained into the Christian experience, only that the mind and body should be developed to its highest possible natural discipline. This cannot do other than aid the Spirit in convicting them of sin, causing them to realize their need for a Savior. We are talking about the lawful use of the law.
A spanking (whipping, paddling, switching, belting) is indispensable to the removal of guilt in your child. His very conscience (nature) demands punishment.
The guilt burdened soul cries out for the lashes and nails of justice. Your child cannot yet understand that the Creator has been lashed and nailed in his place. Only the rod of correction can preserve his soul until the day of moral dawning.
(This is just not true. Children are innocent until the day of moral dawning. That is why Jesus said, “Let the little children come unto me.” I find nowhere in the Bible that anyone or anything, not even a rod, can preserve a soul. Only Jesus can do that. – Linda)
guilt is only a means to an end, a temporary condition. It’s the soul’s pain, as when we touch something hot, designed to give us warning, to change our actions.
Let the guilt come, and then, while they are yet too young to understand, absolve it by means of the rod. When their time comes, the principles of the cross will be easy to grasp.
Obviously he doesn’t see the rod as “a symbol of authority”.
The Power Of “Absolution.”
The parent holds in his hand (in the form of a little switch) the power to absolve the child of guilt, cleanse his soul, instruct his spirit, strengthen his resolve, and give him a fresh start through a confidence that all indebtedness is paid. “The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly (Prov. 20:30).” “Inward parts of the belly” is a description of the physical sensations associated with guilt.
A child properly and timely spanked is healed in the soul and restored to wholeness of spirit. A child can be turned back from the road to hell through proper spankings.
(I think that he’s misinterpreting Proverbs 23:13-14 here. I don’t agree with his interpretation at all. – Linda)
The Magic Wand
After a short explanation about bad attitudes and the need to love, patiently and calmly apply the rod to his back-side. Somehow, after eight or ten licks, the poison is transformed into gushing love and contentment.
It seems to me that the poison is transferred deep down in the psych where it will fester until the child grows up.
Chapter 7 – Philosophy of the Rod
The Teaching Rod
The rod is the parents’ main tangible aid to bring the child to understand the judgment of God–and eventually the grace of God.
So I guess children must be raised under OT Law until … (when?) and then in NT grace?
Unless all transgression, rebellion and meanness of spirit be treated as God treats sin, the child’s world view will be false.
How does God treat sin? I guess this is the difference between “law-based” and “grace-based” discipline.
Chapter 9 – Training Examples
A Switch At Nap Time Saves Mine
When your baby is tired and sleepy enough to become irritable, don’t reinforce irritability by allowing the cause and effect to continue. Put the little one to sleep. But what of the grouch who would rather complain than sleep? Get tough. Be firm with him. Never put him down and then allow him to get up. If, after putting him down, you remember he just woke up, do not reward his complaining by allowing him to get up. For the sake of consistency in training, you must follow through. He may not be able to sleep, but he can be trained to lie there quietly. He will very quickly come to know that any time he is laid down there is no alternative but to stay put. To get up is to be on the firing line and get switched back down. It will become as easy as putting a rag doll to bed. Those who are MOSTLY consistent must use the switch too often. Those who are ALWAYS consistent come to almost never need the switch.
Ahh, I’m training my child to be a rag doll. Hmmm. Also, how do adjust for a growing child who goes from two naps to one nap to no naps? How long do you switch them & send them back to bed? Since it’s the parent who is determining when the child needs to nap, not the child.
The other day at our house, a three-year-old little girl was playing with dolls. ….. Up until about a year ago, she was disobedient and spoiled. ….. Today she is an ideal little girl, always obedient and cheerful. What was interesting is the role she assumed with her baby. In her imagination the baby started crying after being given a command. She scolded her baby, turned her over and spanked her. She then spoke comforting, reassuring words and praised her baby for being good. She perfectly mimicked the loving, patient tone and firmness of her own mother.
As we sneaked a peek at the proceedings, she continued her “mother practice” session. Several situations arose with her rag baby which she promptly and firmly dealt with like an old pro. In fact, I could not have handled the make-believe situations any better. She told the screaming child (a rag doll). “No! That’s not nice. You can’t have it now. Stop your crying. SWITCH, SWITCH. If you don’t stop crying, Mama will have to spank you again. SWITCH, SWITCH, SWITCH. OK, stop crying now. That’s better. Now see if you can play happily.”
Here is a three-year-old “mother” already prepared to rear happy obedient children. She knows exactly what to expect from her mother. And, what is further amazing, she knows exactly what her mother expects from her. She disciplined her baby doll for attitudes, not actions. This three-year-old little girl is a near finished product. The battle is won. As long as the parents consistently maintain what they have already instilled, the child will never be anything but a blessing and help.
The ideal child is always obedient and cheerful? I don’t see attitudes being disciplined, I see emotions being punished.
As The Wheel Turn
After about ten acts of stubborn defiance, followed by ten switchings, he surrendered his will to one higher than himself. In rolling the wheel, he did what every accountable human being must do–he humbled himself before the “highest” and admitted that his interests are not paramount. ….. The surly attitude was all gone. In its place was contentment, thankfulness and a fellowship with his peers. The “rod” had lived up to its Biblical promise.
Chapter 10 – Safety Training
Being a hunting family, we have always had guns around the house. With little ones, we made sure to keep the guns out of reach. But, with the possibility of their sooner or later coming in contact with a loaded gun, we trained them for safety.
With our first toddler, I placed an old, unused and empty, single-shot shot-gun in the living room corner. After taking the toddler through the “No” saying, hand-switching sessions, they knew guns were always off limits. Every day they played around the gun without touching it. I never had to be concerned with their going into someone else’s house and touching a gun. I didn’t gun-proof my house, I gun-proofed my children.
Would a toddler really know not to touch all guns in all other houses? I remember Dr. Sears saying somewhere (I’ve looked & looked but can’t find it) that just because you teach your child not to touch the stove at home, they still won’t know that applies to Grandma’s stove. (anyone else remember this?)
These sections both describe natural consequences, right?
Snap To It!
I have taught the children to obey first and ask questions later. When they were small and I put them through paces, they learned to immediately do what I said. If they ever failed to instantly obey a command, I would “drill” them. “Sit down. Don’t speak until I tell you to.” Understand, I was not taking out frustrations. It was all done in the utmost pleasantness and usually even fun. “Stand up,” I would say. “Now come here. Go touch the door.” And, before they could get there, “Sit.” Plop, down they would go. “Now, go to your rooms and clean them up.” Just like little, proud soldiers, off they would go to the task.
If one of them should fail in his attitude, he would be spanked–without haste or hostility, mind you. Negligence or clumsiness was a time for patience and grace, but lazy rebellion was punished with the rod.
This may sound all cold and harsh. I hope it doesn’t; for it was warm, friendly, loving, and produced confident, calm, hard working, loyal children and adults. In actuality, because of our consistency, the children were seldom spanked. They soon learned that every transgression received a “Just recompense of reward.” They knew, without a doubt, that to even delay obedience meant a meeting with the rod. Delayed obedience was dealt with as disobedience. Such firmness with consistency makes for a sense of security.
But when do the children get to think for themselves??
And why is a desire to avoid pain a “good” motivation for obedience? Wouldn’t you rather your children obeyed because they respect you & your authority over them?
I guess the children are *secure* in the knowledge that most anything they do other than sitting still & smiling will result in a whuppin’. 😥
Chapter 13 – Attitude Training
Keeping Little Hearts
Training must consider the actions, but discipline should be concerned only with the child’s attitude. It is embarrassing to see a parent upset at a child for spilling milk or acting their normal, clumsy self. Judge them as God judges us–by the heart.
But we are not God. How can we truly see what is in our child’s heart?
On the other hand, there are times when there is no disobedience, but the attitude is completely rotten. A parent must be on guard to discern attitudes. If we wait until actions become annoying to initiate discipline, we only deal with the surface symptoms. The root of all sin is in the heart. Know your child’s heart and guard it. “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life (Prov. 4:23).” It will be several years before your child can “keep” his or her own heart; until then it is entrusted to you.
Where does he get the idea that a parent is to “keep” their child’s heart?
Grin, you have secret weapons: * A plan * Love * Patience * Reproof * THE ROD OF CORRECTION * Endurance.
Although he tosses in love & patience, it’s the rod that’s given pre-eminence. (those are his capitalizations)
Some have asked, “But what if the child only screams louder, gets madder?” Know that if he is accustomed to getting his unrestricted way, you can expect just such a response. He will just continue to do what he has always done to get his way. It is his purpose to intimidate you and make you feel like a crud pile.
His purpose is to intimidate & make you feel like crud?? 😯 This example is talking of a 7 mo old!! How can anyone see such deviousness in an infant, that they could be capable of such manipulation?
They Better Not Mistreat My Baby
If he is roughed-up by his peers, rejoice; he is learning early about the real world. Don’t make a sissy out of him. If you jump to his defense every time another child takes away a toy, pushes your child down, or even pops him in the nose, you will rear a social crybaby.
When you demand that your child be treated fairly, you are protecting him from reality. The younger they are, the better to learn that they deserve no equality.
I can’t even put my thoughts into words to comment on this. Anyone else?
Bad attitude is pure bad. For as a child “thinketh in his heart, so is he (Prov. 23: 7).” “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life (Prov. 4:23).” If a child shows the least displeasure in response to a command or duty, it should be addressed as disobedience. If a child sticks out his lip, you should focus your training on his bad attitude. The wrong slant of the shoulders reveals a bad frame of mind. Consider this a sign to instruct, train or discipline. A cheerful, compliant spirit is the norm. Anything else is a sign of trouble.
Chapter14 – Emotional Control
The Amish Family
When an Amish family with their twelve children comes over to visit, you would think it was a Japanese delegation, for all the self-control and order present. The children are taught to maintain control of their emotions. They are all respectful of your property and presence. When in the presence of adults, the children don’t talk or play loudly. If hurt, they don’t cry excessively. The children learn to give-over when their rights are trampled on by another child. This is consistently accomplished through consistent training and discipline.
Is it good for children to be this way? I would expect such behavior from older children, but what about younger children?
Sounds like “Children should be seen and not heard.”
Crying Babies, Or Crybabies
When ‘crawlers’ or ‘scooters’ cry, there should be a legitimate reason. If they are hungry, feed them. If they are sleepy, put them down for a nap. If they are truly hurt, give time for the pain to subside. If they are physically uncomfortable, adjust the environment. If they are wet, change them. If they are afraid, hold them close. If they are grouching, discipline them to get control of their self-centeredness. If they are mad, switch them. Don’t let your child stay unhappy. Meet the real needs and make their selfish crying an unrewarding experience.
Again, “happy is the only acceptable emotion.”
Chapter 17 – Religious Whips
Good Memories Are Welcomed
The school Principal did the really serious paddling when I was in school. I have lived nearly a half century and still feel apprehensive going into the office at a public school. He and I had a couple of serious encounters. One of these days I am going to make an effigy of a school principal and then tell him to bend over and grab his ankles.
So after 50 years, he’s still holding a grudge? But he expects his children to be happy & thank him for the same treatment?
I finally finished reading TTUAC. I didn’t have any comments on the last couple chapters, so I thought I’d share some general comments here.
Amy (wholly mama) expressed interest in doing an in-depth critique of the book, so I just started reading & posting my comments off the top of my head as certain sections jumped out at me. I didn’t try to do any analysis for rebuttal, although that’s something that will be needed.
If anyone else has been reading along in the book, I’d love to see your thoughts & comments on it. Feel free to use the chapter threads I’ve started, even if you’re addressing a section I didn’t. Or start your own post.
If you haven’t been reading the book, there are huge sections & even whole chapters that I didn’t comment on, for one of the following reasons:
1) It wasn’t pertinent – ex. a chapter on Infant Potty Training
2) I only had one comment & it was redundant to a point I made elsewhere
3) He was sharing an example based on Premise A, leading to Point B and Point C. Because I disagreed with the assumption of Premise A, there was no point in debating B & C.
4) I agreed with him.
In all fairness, I feel I need to say that this is not a “totally evil book”. There are quite a few things in there that are truthful & good. He does stress getting to know your child, doing things with them they like to do, being their friend, loving them, teaching them. But as others have said, the good that is in there can be found in other sources that do not have all the bad with it.
Phew! Now I’m ready to detox with a re-reading of Biblical Parenting. Anyone want to join me in that?
(Thanks to Wendy for allowing me to post her insightful comments here – Linda)