thoughts on training

Living With A Handful blog has some Thoughts About Training. These thoughts are a follow up to her post about the verse Proverbs 6:22, “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it” .

total depravity theology

Elizabeth Esther looks at How the “I am a worm”/total depravity theology hurts children. She links this belief with abuse and makes some good points.

Secular Homeschooling Magazine

The homeschooling movement is taking notice of the Pearls. Secular Homeschooling is a rather large magazine and they have written an exposé of the Pearls and their teachings. She looks at all aspects of the Pearls and gives some advice on how to respond when offered the book at a homeschool gathering.

To Train Up a Child: The Greater Problem by Deborah Markus

Suzanne’s Testimony

I just found a lovely new testimony and argument.

Drop The Training and Regret Less by Suzanne Parker

Quotes from To Train Up A Child

When quoting from TTUAC, we should be careful about paraphrasing. We are being accused of misquoting. Here are some quotes from the book, which is found online at www.achristianhome.org/to_train_up_a_child.htm. I got the page numbers from quotes which are in circulation (originating from stoptherod.net) but I painstakingly checked each quote in the book to make sure that I am using direct quotes.

The Pearls recommend switching infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They describe switching their own 4 month old daughter (p.9).

At four months she was too unknowing to be punished for disobedience. But for her own good, we attempted to train her not to climb the stairs by coordinating the voice command of “No” with little spats on the bare legs. The switch was a twelve-inch long, one-eighth-inch diameter sprig from a willow tree.

On p.60 they recommend switching babies who cannot sleep and are crying, and to never allow them “to get up.”

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.

On p.79 they recommend whipping a 7 month old for screaming.

A seven-month-old boy had, upon failing to get his way, stiffened clenched his fists, bared his toothless gums and called down damnation on the whole place. At a time like that, the angry expression on a baby’s face can resemble that of one instigating a riot. The young mother, wanting to do the right thing, stood there in helpless consternation, apologetically shrugged her shoulders and said, “What can I do?” My incredulous nine-year-old whipped back, “Switch him.” The mother responded, “I can’t, he’s too little.” With the wisdom of a veteran who had been on the little end of the switch, my daughter answered, “If he is old enough to pitch a fit, he is old enough to be spanked.”

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.

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. After one begrudged roll, my wife turned to other chores.

On p.56 Debi Pearl trades blows with a 2 year old.

This time, her bottom came off the couch as she drew back to return the blow; and I heard a little karate like wheeze come from somewhere deep inside.

On p.59 they recommend whipping a 3 year old until he is “totally broken.”

She then administers about ten slow, patient licks on his bare legs. He cries in pain. If he continues to show defiance by jerking around and defending himself, or by expressing anger, then she will wait a moment and again lecture him and again spank him. When it is obvious he is totally broken, she will hand him the rag and very calmly say, “Johnny, clean up your mess.” He should very contritely wipe up the water.

On p.55 the Pearls say a mother should hit her child if he cries for her.

If a father is attempting to make a child eat his oats, and the child cries for his mother, then the mother should respond by spanking him for whining for her and for not eating his oats. He will then be glad to be dealing only with the father.

On p.46 the Pearls say that if a child does obey before being spanked, spank them anyway. And “if you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher.” “Defeat him totally.”

Never reward delayed obedience by reversing the sentence. And, unless all else fails, don’t drag him to the place of cleansing. Part of his training is to come submissively. However, if you are just beginning to institute training on an already rebellious child, who runs from discipline and is too incoherent to listen, then use whatever force is necessary to bring him to bay. If you have to sit on him to spank him then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher, more patiently enduring and are unmoved by his wailing. Defeat him totally. Accept no conditions for surrender. No compromise. You are to rule over him as a benevolent sovereign. Your word is final.

On p.80 they say

On the bare legs or bottom, switch him eight or ten licks; then, while waiting for the pain to subside, speak calm words of rebuke. If the crying turns to a true, wounded, submissive whimper, you have conquered; he has submitted his will. If the crying is still defiant, protesting and other than a response to pain, spank him again.

On p.47 they give details of what to use for a spanking instrument.

Any spanking, to effectively reinforce instruction, must cause pain, but the most pain is on the surface of bare skin where the nerves are located. A surface sting will cause sufficient pain, with no injury or bruising. Select your instrument according to the child’s size. For the under one year old, a little, ten- to twelve-inch long, willowy branch (striped of any knots that might break the skin) about one-eighth inch diameter is sufficient. Sometimes alternatives have to be sought. A one-foot ruler, or its equivalent in a paddle, is a sufficient alternative. For the larger child, a belt or larger tree branch is effective.

The Pearls  recommend pulling a nursing infant’s hair (p.7)

One particularly painful experience of nursing mothers is the biting baby. My wife did not waste time finding a cure. When the baby bit, she pulled hair (an alternative has to be sought for baldheaded babies).

They recommend hosing off a child outside in order to clean him if he continues to soil himself.

So, my suggestion was that the father explain to the boy that, now that he was a man, he would no longer be washed in the house. He was too big and too stinky to be cleaned by the babywipes. From now on, he would be washed outside with a garden hose.

Link to “Pearls” of Wisdom?

Just added to In-Depth Analysis links

“Pearls” of Wisdom? by Woman Uncensored includes numerous quotes from NGJ site

link to What Frog and Toad Can Teach Us…

Karen from from Now… Through a Glass Darkly has written a follow up to her last post which I have added to In Depth Analysis

Stand With an Open Heart–What Frog and Toad Can Teach Us about What Lydia Schatz Might Have Said

Paula Lilly’s testimony

This is my personal account of my experiences with following the advice of Micheal Pearl, author of To Train Up A  Child

I had many fears and apprehensions about parenting even before my first child was born.  Many of them had to do with discipline.  I was all too aware of what would be expected from me as a parent/disciplinarian and what types of behavior would be expected from  my children by friends, family members, church and school figures, etc.   As I waded nervously past the 6-month mark with my first son, I experienced the challenge of setting boundaries for a very mobile and emotionally intense little boy.   I began to try out different approaches–relying heavily on the religious and cultural  common knowledge of my society, and following the advice of authors/teachers who were endorsed by the circles in which I moved.

Some of the books I read, such as Dobson’s widely-heralded Dare To Discipline, left me feeling confused and powerless.  He recommends spanking as the response to most misbehaviors, but prohibits it for children under 18 months of age.  He speaks of showing grace toward childish, age-appropriate behavior, but paints children themselves as wicked, rebellious creatures who are bent on mounting a willful–even malicious–challenge to parental authority.   He provides very few solid, specific suggestions for dealing with normal developmental behaviors (other than encouraging parents to require absolute obedience).  He pulls his readers into an adversarial stance toward children with stories of  “little tyrants” whose unchecked behavior holds their trembling, pathetic parents hostage.  Parents are repeatedly drilled on the necessity of utterly defeating the enemy–their children.

Pearl was different.  Although many of the basic premises he taught matched up with what I had heard and believed my entire life,  Pearl offered something that was missing from the other books I had read–something very significant to me as a young and totally inexperienced mother.  He offered detail.  Pearl straight-forwardly addressed all the common baby and toddler issues that were cropping up with my young son.  He gave example after example of behaviors that I was seeing first-hand in my everyday life.  He offered a simple and all-encompassing solution to each and every one of them–”training.” He pre-emptively diffused my concerns about age-appropriateness and my questions about my son’s level of understanding by (initially) adopting the theme of “training–not punishment.” His extremely behavoristic approach and the wide age range over which he applied it did cause me some consternation and hesitation.  It set off some  warning flags in the heart of this mother who had thus far sought to listen, respond to, and nourish the entire being of her child.

Pearl had made provisions for these types of reservations as well.  His writings are laced with reprovals for tender-hearted mothers. He preys upon the natural concern that many parents already have over raising children, whipping it into a frenzied anxiety with predictions of hellfire and destruction for any child not raised according to his parenting gospel. He disparages the character of anyone who feels incapable of administering his brand of discipline  and he assigns lack of spirituality to those who cannot “overcome”  their own abusive pasts enough to implement his regimen of pain-based negative conditioning.

Unhealthy teachings nearly always include elements of truth–sound, palatable, commendable concepts that lend credibility to both the character of the teacher and the philosophy as a whole.  Pearl is no exception.  He communicates with an air of good ole country common sense and next-door neighbor friendliness, and his intentions seem honorable and sincere to many first-time readers.  He urges parents to tie “heart strings”  with their children and warns against undue harshness.  Many of the statements he makes in this (comparatively short) section of his first book are ones with which I still whole-heartedly agree. Unfortunately, he expands on those relationship-centered thoughts by exhorting parents to exact merciless control over their children’s behaviors and attitudes.

In retrospect, I can identify some things that made me susceptible to his message.  First, I had no experience whatsoever with babies or children and felt tremendously unqualified to relate to my own child in matters of discipline.  Second, I came from a rather legalistic church background, and was drawn to a system that followed a formula–defining for me exactly how to deal with infractions.  Third, I was already indoctrinated into the paradigm of controlling children’s behaviors via punishment.  I viewed discipline as practically synonymous with punishment/spanking, and believed that corporeal punishment was Biblically ordained and mandated.  It was not a far reach to extend that pre-existing belief (spanking is the correct parental response to disobedience or defiance) into a similar but subtly different approach (spanking is an appropriate and acceptable way for parents to pre-emptively condition young children to display desirable behaviors).

I spent several weeks pouring over Pearl’s books, debating sections that concerned me, questioning whether my discomfort really was due to spiritual weakness or ineptitude (as Pearl implies), reading excerpts to my husband.  I tentatively tested bits of the method.  I reviewed other perspectives for comparison, but dismissed any that did not endorse spanking–believing them to be unbiblical at the core.  The mainstream Christian resources I considered presented ideas or methods (or both) which seemed like watered-down versions of the same doctrine Pearl taught.  After a couple of false starts–due mostly to my struggling with strong instincts against the method–we finally started “training” our son in earnest.  I followed Pearl’s advice faithfully and consistently over a significant period of time.

The results were disastrous, damaging, and nothing at all like the peaceful, orderly family life Pearl describes. He asserts that most children, especially young ones, can be brought into “joyful submission” after 3 days of consistent training, and that the need for spankings will diminish once the parent establishes her authority.  This did not prove true for us.  Weeks and months went by. My not-quite-2-year-old son became increasingly combative, jumpy, and fearful.  He seemed to have developed a “fight or flight” response to me–poising himself to run away at the drop of the hat, covering his bottom when he thought I might disapprove of what he was doing, or bracing himself for battle when he sensed that he was “in trouble”  and there was no where to go.  He physically battled and verbally protested every spanking and fought back fiercely against every hint of perceived injustice.  Even though he could not yet verbalize with words, he expressed his confusion, fear, fury, indignation, and emotional pain with every resource available to him at the time.

Pearl–and other authors who embrace the same ideals–would have me interpret these reactions as rebellion, defiance…  a sinful “bad attitude” to be purged by means of more punishment.   He advises parents to persist at all costs, to have no mercy, to use whatever physical force is necessary to subdue the will of a child who fights back.  (In a similar sense, though with fewer descriptive examples, Dobson instills the mantra of “winning the war”  against our children–using spanking as the primary weapon)  Pearl urges parents to sit on a struggling child, if necessary, in order to administer this Biblically mandated act that he claims is a  vital element to cleanse their souls, clear their consciences, communicate spiritual principles, and restore a loving, connected relationship.  He insists that the parent must not relent or back away from continuing to spank until the child has utterly submitted to the parent’s desire in both attitude and action–no matter how many sequential and increasingly intense spankings are required to do so.

When the basic training approach delivered less than 100% compliance and, indeed, actually inflamed my son’s negative behaviors, I found myself faced with following the escalation procedure.  Spank more..  harder..  with a larger implement…  don’t relent until they obey.  I am grieved to say I started down this path for a time. There came a point of “critical mass”  where every part of me cried out against what was happening… where I could no longer accept that this was the only right way to parent…  where the doubts and questions and frustrations in my heart refused to be silenced for a moment longer.  I began to question my long-held belief that spanking was a special, “God-ordained” type of striking (as opposed to “real” hitting)–not a form of “real” violence.  I struggled to define for myself the difference between a Christian parent who hits in obedience to what they think the Bible says, and an unbelieving parent who hits simply to control.  I tried to discern the distinction between repetitive striking that was godly and repetitive striking that was simply abusive.  I was forced to admit to myself that I could not identify exactly what the difference was–other than the intentions and beliefs of the person doing the hitting.  That scared me.  I knew in my heart that each day I followed this punitive, formula-centered advice was another day I walked the slippery slope of mistreating my child in the name of God. I stopped–not yet having any idea what to do instead.

The journey that began in my life at that point has been truly amazing.  God has taught me, matured me, uplifted me, convicted me, humbled me, and led me to a path of parenting I never knew existed. I am still at the bottom of the learning curve for grace-centered, spirit-filled parenting.  I struggle and fail daily.  The poor choices I made and the bad advice I followed early have left their marks on my children as individual people, on our family unit as a whole, and definitely on me.  Having trained myself to vigilantly punish every instance of disobedience, I now struggle to let go of that critical, fault-finding  outlook.  It requires purposeful effort for me now to  *see*  the positive things my kids do, to relate to them in the light of who they are instead of whether they are doing right or wrong.

I want my children to see Christ in me, not to see me as their god.  I want them to understand the grace and mercy and love that God shows to us because they’ve experienced it in relationship with their parents. I want them to learn to live by the Spirit and not the letter of the law–knowing that godliness is so much deeper than a set of outward behaviors and that our spiritual sinfulness cannot be paid for simply by our enduring a physical punishment.  In fact, restitution for our sins has already been made–praise God!  I pray that my parenting, above all, will reflect the gospel of Christ.

Linda V’s Arguments

Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.  Proverbs 22:6  KJV

Train [Or Start ] a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it. Proverbs 22:6 NIV

It has come to my attention that many Christian parents have interpreted the above verse to mean that they must train infants and young children in the way one might train an animal.  I believe that this interpretation is not correct.  I base this conclusion on the following study:

The Hebrew word which is translated as “Train” in Proverbs 22:6 is kha-nokh. When I cut and paste the real Hebrew חנך into the Hebrew-English Dictionary, it shows these words “to guide, to tutor, to educate ; (biblical) to teach” as well as “to inaugurate, to dedicate, to consecrate” as the NIV translation mentions.  You can try it for yourself using the links I provided.

In the same verse, “Child” is Na-ar, נַּעַר which translates as “youth, youngster, adolescent ; (law) minor; (biblical) servant, armsbearer.”  This word can be used for infants, or very young children but is more often used for youth, adolescents and adults.  It is clear to me that everything in the Bible which refers to discipline is refering to youth, adolescents and adults.

I am also deeply concerned about the concept that we have a right to control a child’s heart.  Insisting that they always obey with a “happy heart” only teaches them to hide their true feelings.  Michael Pearl says, “If a child shows the least displeasure in response to a command or duty, it should be addressed as disobedience.”  Since he teaches to correct all disobedience with the rod, it is obvious that he is saying to switch the child until they are showing nothing but happiness.  He promises that switching the child will produce a happy child and demonstrates it with countless anecdotes.  It seems obvious to many readers of these stories that the child has no choice but to act happy, as any other show of emotion only means more switching.

-

Linda V.

Amy’s Arguments

  • The philosophical underpinnings of these kinds of “Christian” behaviour “training” models do not sit well with biblical theology.

    The more I read about Ezzo and Pearl’s behaviour modification techniques the more I am reminded of Behaviouristic psychology (the works of Skinner, Watson, Pavlov etc)

    Fundamentally, behavioural psychology advocates the use operant/classical conditioning for behaviour modification (neg or pos reinforcement and the pleasure/avoidance stimulus responses they entail).

    From a purely pragmatic standpoint these often demonstratably work – they get results…for example,

    I see the needle + it causes me pain
    I avoid needles

    I eat chocolate = I feel good
    In order to feel good, I eat chocolate, lol

    …but the understanding of human nature behind it is disturbing from a Christian standpoint.

    At the roots of Behaviourism are a worldview that totally denies that people have

    (a) real emotions (such as love, grief, hatred etc.) our internal states are just a sum of the internal processing of our external behaviour, conditioned according to stimulus response

    (b) personality preferences (unless they’ve been ‘shaped’ through outside behavioural control)

    (c) a moral conscience – people simply learn to “react” and “behave” [so much for God's laws being written on our hearts and minds...]

    (d) original thoughts/ideas – including the ‘big ideas’ like truth and beauty AND God

    (e) self determination or internal self control [just behaviour patterns that have conformed to external reward/punishment patterns]

    (f) a soul (this is ‘superstition’ which we have been conditioned to believe for purposes of social control or it gratifies some conditioned response)

    OK, so I’ve said that in practise operant/classical conditioning works – we all use it whenever we praise our children for doing something good…but to RELY on punishment/reward for behaviour modification or use it as a sole means of teaching/training a child?

    What a naive and Godless conception of what it is to be a human! Methinks of that song lyric – ‘Despite all my rage, I am still but a rat in a cage!” – Amy in Australia