Child Abuse, Bloggers and Boycotts, Oh My!
Filed Under: Freedom & Politics, Homeschooling, Parenting
A four year old boy was killed when his adoptive mother wrapped him too tightly in blankets in an effort to get him to stay in bed. Apparently she was a big believer in the “spare the rod, spoil the child” mentality professed by Michael and Debi Pearl in their book “To Train Up a Child” (even the title of this book is offensive to me). This story has led to a vicious backlash from the homeschool blogging community to boycott the Homeschoolblogger.com network, whose founders appear to support and defend the Pearls’ form of discipline.
You can start here, read the comments and follow the links to other bloggers ranting on this issue.
My philosophy is generally “to live and let live,” but with emphasis on the “let live.” I simply can’t see any justification for the abuse of a child.
PHAT = Parenting, Homeschooling And Technology. That about sums up my life at the moment. 
Subscribe To This Blog
Tabz | Mar 20, 2006 | Reply
That’s ridiculous. That’s not discipline - that’s abuse. I don’t care what she believes.
Tabz | Mar 20, 2006 | Reply
I read the whole entry. Honestly I’ve never been a fan of boycotting. Homeschoolblogger.com has a right to rent ad space to whoever has the money to pay for it. Boycotting usually doesn’t solve anything - it won’t bring that kid back - and it only serves to make people mad.
Sassy | Mar 20, 2006 | Reply
That is child abuse, pure and simple. Sick. People like that piss me off!!!
Angela, Mother Crone | Mar 20, 2006 | Reply
I read it all, and had even read the Pearl’s book. Frankly, this woman had a real twisted view of it. Punishment should be for direct disobedience…not a frustrated little boys’ trouble staying in bed. It is scary that people are that ignorant. I am not one to boycott, though. It ALWAYS punishes others along the way, and is not an effective and direct means of accomplishing anything positive.
K | Mar 20, 2006 | Reply
Hi, just found your blog via the carnival, and also sent my submission. Great blog. I’ll be a regular!
Thanks,
Kim
Laurel | Mar 20, 2006 | Reply
I’m uneasy with this abusive mother being labelled as an “adoptive mother.” Yes, it is what she was. But highlighting that fact could feed stereotypes about adoption.
COD | Mar 21, 2006 | Reply
Thanks for the link.
Michelle | Mar 21, 2006 | Reply
I use homeschoolblogger.com for my blog, and I’m not a believer of “spare the rod and spoil the child” at all!
Please don’t boycott an entire site based on the views of a few people.
Linda | Mar 21, 2006 | Reply
This is such a tragedy on many fronts. Personally, I will not be boycotting homeschoolblogger.com. I think a better way to share your opinion is to write a letter to Paul and Gena Suarez(PUBLISHER@THEHOMESCHOOLMAGAZINE.COM)
Just my two cents.
God Bless,
Linda
PS
You have beautiful children, very happy. And a neat blog.
COD | Mar 21, 2006 | Reply
Linda - I agree, for members of HSB. Paul and Gena should care a lot about what their members say. The rest of us? Not so much.
Michelle - Site traffic is directly correlated to site revenue in an advertising supported business model. You hosting there puts money in the pocket of people that openly support an author that advocates abuse.
Dani | Mar 21, 2006 | Reply
Doc | Mar 21, 2006 | Reply
The Pearls advocate beating babies. The Old Schoolhouse Magazine (owned by the same people who own homeschoolblogger) supports this abuse by selling ad space to them. You can’t justify the methods the Pearls use no matter how many times you try. It’s sick, and wrong. There are many many MANY methods of correction that do not include hitting children with plumbing pipe. My own children are well adjusted, loving, well behaved young adults - and they’ve NEVER been hit. Just stop the madness.
Doc | Mar 21, 2006 | Reply
And Dani, your children are conditioned, like animals, to fear being hit. I hope they can afford therapy later.
Shannon | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
Thanks to everyone for your comments on this issue. For sure, there are MANY people in the world that discipline their children physically. Personally, when I look at my children, I could *never* imagine raising a hand to them.
Like Dani, I believe much of today’s youth have no fear of consequences and that children need boundaries. But unlike Dani, the words “train” and “obey” are not a part of my parenting vocabulary. Instead of training, I prefer modeling proper behavior and using positive reinforcement. Instead of obeying, my childen are encourged to think freely and are exposed to natural consequences.
I prefer to say “follow my example” rather than “do as I say, not as I do.”
Trixie | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
Such a hot topic and so little time to respond! I have read only excerpts and some third party critique/support for the Pearls’ book, so I will not claim I know precisely what they advocate. Still, this discussion raises quite a few interesting issues, and I’m not surprised people are heated on both sides. I’ll begin by saying I’ve never once hit any of my children… I do consider it unethical (in the sense that I think it’s a poor parenting strategy for raising well-adjusted, principled, self-disciplined, and self-responsible adults, which is my goal), but like smoking a pack of cigarettes a day (which I also consider unethical) I don’t think it’s criminal either. Lots of bloggers here have damned the Pearls by simply calling their approach “abusive”, which usually suggests a belief that it should be outlawed. Without any support for this claim, however, I find these comments uncompelling. What exactly constitutes abuse? Where do you draw your line and why? I’ve read comments of people who think denying children a public education to educate them at home constitutes abuse, and I’m not compelled by their label either (nor would I want their opinions forced onto me). As with Shannon’s recent blog entry on abortion, this topic relates directly to child rights vs. parental rights. I think most people would agree that a child should not have the right (as an adult should) to press assault charges against their parents for an occasional swat or spanking (or for being denied the right to eat nothing but candy or take a walk in the woods alone or play outside until 1 a.m.). Children do not yet retain the rational capacity to make such decisions for themselves, and it is both the responsibility and right of their parents and/or guardians to impose certain decisions upon them as they nurture them to self-reliant adulthood. I can (and momentarily will!) argue about what sorts of parenting decisions are healthy and appropriate to raising well-adjusted adults, but I remain uncomfortable imposing my opinions on other parents via force of law.
Having said this, I very much disagree with Dani’s approach to discipline. Compared to past generations, today’s youth do have less fear of authority, but I don’t think this is the cause of any observed increases in behavior/moral problems. Dani seems to assume that one must either force children into submission via threat, fear, and punishment or they will necessarily resort to some sort of innate (original sin?) drive to amoral behavior. (From what I understand of the Pearls and others like them, acceptance of original sin — or at least some innate human predisposition to wickedness — is a foundational premise of their parenting approach. Any approach that advocates the punishing of infants suggests that one’s capacity to conceptualize or reason is immaterial to one’s moral development. What they seem to accept instead is the existence of an inborn, unchosen human depravity that needs to be controlled and beaten out of us early on if we’re to have any hope of moral living.) If these were the only two options for raising children, I might agree that the first were a better approach. But I don’t accept original sin, nor do I believe that living morally means having to reign in natural, selfish desires in an attempt to comply with some arbitrary moral imperatives handed down by some authority (parents, rulers, or deity). According to my world view, living morally means recognizing one’s own human nature, psychology, capacities, and needs, and acting in accordance with them. It means recognizing and understanding the discourse proper to human beings within the reality of our universe if one is to best achieve success, fulfillment, and happiness. To do so requires much mental development, experience and knowledge, and as a child slowly develops the capacity to think, conceptualize, and reason, he will hit many bumps on the road of moral development (unlike Dani, I don’t expect my children’s moral behavior to be perfectly adult — if it were, they would need no more parenting and would be fully self-sufficient and rights-bearing adults). But I think this journey of moral development is the only way to achieve true self-discipline, self-responsibility, and ultimately psychological well-being. Like Shannon, I do not aim to achieve “obedience” in my children. To me, this is the moral equivalent of achieving nothing more than rote memorization of facts in math education. I’m confident that I could get my child to memorize and spit back the times tables at age 2 (especially if I threatened her with physical pain), but I wouldn’t claim this made my child a math prodigy. This example demonstrates the difference between mindlessly following rules and conceptualizing and internalizing principles. In all areas of education (perhaps most importantly in ethics), conceptualizing principles is what I hope to help my children achieve.
The trouble with today’s youth isn’t a lack of fear, it’s that the fear placed in children via yesteryear’s popular discipline methods (which led to a sort of blind obedience to authority) has been replaced by a culture of moral relativism — where morality varies from interest group to interest group and/or is determined by the approval of one’s particular society. In our country, people are often not held responsible for their actions, and criminals are often considered “victims” of social pressures, racism, etc. And our culture has erected more and more sets of rules (with undesirable legal consequences) in an attempt to replace any objective view of morality. I’d argue that parents who impose behavioral expectations under threat of physical punishment are preparing their children to accept the predominant moral relativism of our culture and/or a life of fear-driven, blind obedience to authority (be it society, ruler, or deity) while discouraging their children from developing, internalizing, and owning a conceptual, objective, principled ethics. A moral code must be validated by reference to a fundamental value, an ultimate good toward which one’s actions are means. Detached from this context, rules have no rational warrant and can only be accepted arbitrarily on faith or authority. Each time a young child incapable of the moral conceptualization required to make a principled ethical decision is forced to comply under threat of physical pain, he is one step closer to accepting morality as something anti-self and other-imposed. Raising a child in such a manner sets them up to view morality as a constraint placed upon them from the outside and primes them for an adulthood plagued by nameless guilt, self-loathing, and a generalized anxiety/anger. Perhaps parents like Dani consider morality to be just such a external constraint themselves (I’ve encountered many adults, especially highly religious ones, who do). An authoritative, obedience-driven child-rearing discipline style may then be appropriate to their moral view, as obedience to an authority (usually a god) is precisely what defines and drives their own moral behavior. I, however, view morality as a vital human need, something I value as an instrument of my own happiness (and something completely independent of the opinions or edicts of any “authority”). This is the philosophy of ethics I wish to pass to my children, and I understand that it will take both time and patience to instill it, as my children slowly develop the capacity to conceptualize and internalize abstract principles. It’s easy to force a small, powerless human being into compliance under threat of physical pain, but compliance is not my goal.
And so my young children *do* throw tantrums from time to time and (yikes!) even complain about disappointments or constraints they don’t yet understand. They do so freely (without threat or fear of arbitrary other-imposed punishment), as an expression of the very natural emotions derived from the honest exercise of their own (as yet limited) rational capacities. They will, however, suffer the natural, reality-imposed consequences of their actions (people generally don’t like hearing tantrums or being manipulated and will leave the room, for example); as they have such experiences, they learn a lot about the nature of reality, of human beings, and of human relationships. I am confident that as they grow to their parents’ example, they will become capable of recognizing and internalizing the moral principles that will lead them to make appropriate moral choices in the interest their own happiness. And if they never respect authority for merely *being* authority, I will be a very proud parent indeed.
Dani | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
Let me start off by saying that obviously you all love your children dearly and you care about their well-being, which is why you are homeschooling and keeping them out of the god-awful government schools. There mere fact that you are devoted enough to your children to take responsibility for their education speaks volumes about your parenting, regardless of how you discipline.
But, as you all know, children are not born knowing how to be well behaved. You don’t have to teach them to steal a cookie from the cookie jar, lie to get out of trouble, cheat, throw a tantrum, or talk back because all of those things come naturally to children born with a sinful nature.
As parents, we have to diligently teach and train our children to obey. A disciplined child will bring great delight to parents, while a child left to himself to “learn from his own mistakes” will bring shame to the home and destruction to society. Discipline comes from the word “disciple,” it simply means “to teach.” Punish means to give a penalty for an offense, sin, or fault. We must teach our children that certain bad behaviors will lead to punishment otherwise they will grow up without fear of authority. Children who are not properly disciplined and punished, are among the most miserable of children – just look around at the youth of today.
The practical wisdom found in the Pearls book “To Train Up a Child” covers the subject of child rearing and corporal punishment in detail. Parents have the responsibility to seek out the truth and obey it. We only get one chance to raise them, we better do it right!
“Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”
From my perspective, as a Christian, parents are to diligently train our children in the ways of the Lord and when he grows up, he will not depart from that training. Notice it says “train” not “teach.” Many parents teach their children right from wrong, but have failed to “train” them to obey. Spanking is part of the training. Godly discipline will keep children from being dysfunctional later in life.
This “rod” could be a switch from tree branch, a thin belt, or a small wooden spoon. It is not to be a large heavy rod or anything that would cause permanent physical damage. The purpose of a spanking is not to cause any lasting bodily harm, but to cause spiritual correction. A spanking should be swift and cause short-lived pain that makes a point.
Children are not capable of thinking “rationally” about a situation, but they can associate pain with bad behavior. That point is that the small pain they feel now will prevent them from feeling great pain by the act they are committing, which could cause them loss of their lives in some cases. For instance, if a child tries to run across the street, using “natural and logical” consequences could cause the child be run over by a car and killed.
Of course, if you reject God and His instructions, there are no guarantees in how your children will turn out.
“The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left undisciplined brings his mother to shame… But fools despise wisdom and discipline.”
COD | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
Maybe my kids are just geniuses, but somehow we managed to teach them to not play in traffic, without beating them into submission in the process.
Jeanne | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
I *train* my children to question authority, because I don’t want them to become victims of people who are willing to use emotional abuse, physical violence or threat thereof in order to manipulate them. Somehow they have turned out to be respectful, ethical, productive people - and they can think rationally, too!
If this is what God told me to do, then does that mean that I get the guarantee and Dani is rejecting God and his instructions?
Doc | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
The longer this rant goes on, the more perverse it’s getting. Swatting a 4 yr old through their clothes, to get their attention, while lazy and ineffective, is minor abuse; it still tells the child that it’s okay to hit if you’re big. Switching a 7 month old infant who can’t stand with a piece of plumbing apparatus is abuse. Whipping your child everyday at noon for 10 days (after making the child go get the stick off a tree) is absolutely abuse. Abuse conditions people to fear situations that cause them pain, it in no way changes their behavior in regards to the “offense”except to teach them not to get caught.. Training your child to obey is nothing more than brainwashing them to not think for themselves, thereby setting up the perfect environment to brainwash them into Christianity. There is no free will under these conditions. It’s Stockholm syndrome. Start when they are young, beat them every time they do not instantly obey your every whim, and then it’s easy to get them to obey Christian doctrine - little robots programs with the rod. Sick, sick, sick. My kids have never been hit. Stop using Christianity as an excuse to beat on small children. Stop basing your entire parenting philosophy on one out of context piece of scripture while ignoring the rest of the bible.
Trixie | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
Dani writes: “children are not born knowing how to be well behaved.” I agree… this is because at birth, children know next to nothing of their own nature or the nature of reality. They have no conceptual knowledge at all, so how could they possibly have developed abstract ethical principles? My approach to parenting is intended to help my children develop the capacity for sound ethical reasoning. I think this is obviously a very fundamental philosophical difference between us, as you clearly are methodically seeking to instill in your children precisely what I’m seeking to avoid developing in mine — that is, a fear of authority and an unquestioning obedience without regard for their own judgment.
Dani, as you seem to be making your argument mostly via appeals to authority (I assume from the Bible?), I’m not sure you and I have enough common ground to discuss this topic further (I recognize no such authority)… but I do have a few questions (and based on how much common ground you think there may be between us, you may or may not find them worth answering). Why exactly do you think children are born with a “sinful nature”? And what exactly constitutes a “sin”. How do *you* determine what’s sinful — that is, what’s your standard of judgment? And who/what exactly is this “Lord” and “God” to whom you refer? And why do you think we should accept its opinion as truth and unquestioningly obey its demands?
Cindy | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
I love TOS as well as HSB…so no, I won’t be boycotting them. To blame them for the death of a child is insane.
McKenna | Mar 22, 2006 | Reply
I assure you - as a child welfare worker with over a decade of experience - hitting your child with a stick, a wooden spoon, a switch, a cable, a piece of tubing, a club, a tree branch, a table leg..I could go on — these things are abuse. What they teach your child is that you are mean and scary and that you will hurt them if they don’t do what you say. It will teach them to fear you and hate you and resent you. If you forcefeed “spare the rod and spoil the child” down their throat and tell your child that your “God” says that it is your “duty” to hit them — they will learn to fear and hate and resent your God. They will spend their lives searching for someone who will not harm them, believing they can trust no one, believing that there is no God or that God equals cruelty and pain. I, too, have managed to miraculously raise two children without having to hit them with sticks or strike their bodies. I have applied love and structure and logic to their upbringing - let’s notice I said love FIRST. I am consistent - when I say something I *mean* it. So far, neither of my children has killed a cat, shot a president, or disrespected their grandparents. I teach them to think for themselves. And - to be perfectly blunt - if Dani were to land on my workload with bruises on her kids spouting that garbage - we’d be in front of a judge so fast she/he wouldn’t know what hit her/him. People who believe they must HARM their children to love them are doing it wrong - and that’s where every rational person with a brain in their head has a duty to protect the people who can’t protect themselves.
Dani | Mar 23, 2006 | Reply
Trixie:
You asked some very legitimate questions and they are worthy of a response. If you sincerely want to know please send me an email and I would be more than happy to answer them for you. You can access it through my profile.
Unfortunately, some people don’t want to hear what I say, and there is some censorship going on since my last comment mysteriously disappeared. I’m not going to devote the time to posting only for it to get deleted, but I don’t mind sharing the truth with those who are seeking the answers.
It’s pretty funny how everyone can slander, criticize, and insult me because of my lifestyle, but as soon as I dish back a little dirt – it gets erased. What’s up with that?
If you all are so confident in your beliefs, why do you view me as such a threat?
Shannon | Mar 23, 2006 | Reply
I did delete one of Dani’s comments because I found it insulting and offensive to another commenter. It’s my blog and I have the right to do that. The comment contained only name-calling and no other information pertinent to this discussion.Dani - no one views you as a threat. Oh, wait, yes I do view you as a threat. A threat to reason. A threat to freedom. Please feel free to answer Trixie’s questions here. We are all definitely interested in “the truth.” If you can prove to me that there is a God that requires us to hit our children in order to achieve after-life salvation, well, then, I suppose I’ll go buy myself some plumbing supplies.
Doc | Mar 23, 2006 | Reply
Shannon, don’t apologize or explain yourself - thinking people understand you are perfectly within your rights to edit your blog anyway you’d like. I’m a bit tired of hearing the word “censorship” tossed around, especially when used incorrectly. When individuals practice censorship, it’s called discretion, when gov’ts do it, it’s a loss of rights. Apparently some Christians truly believe that they are the only ones free of “censorship” and “agenda”. It’s hypocrisy. It’s also a lie - maybe they should all be whipped daily, 10 times, with a switch they’ve cut from a tree.
dinomomm | Mar 23, 2006 | Reply
Wow! This issue has really touched a nerve, and from personal experience I can see why. A few years back I was given a copy of “To Train Up A Child” by a well-meaning friend. I read it and, being a Christian, thought there might be a bit of merit, if not taken to extremes. For example, although I never did it myself, I could see the value in “training” children at home to sit quietly still for public places in which they would be expected to do so, such as a court room, a formal meeting or church. (My own children’s “training” took place in these very settings–and they learned by admonition and example, not with a switch.)
Nevertheless, one day I had the opportunity to watch “training-in-action” with one of my friend’s five children. The little girl in question was mildly developmentally disabled and I was shocked to see her mother “switch” her in to submission. This little girl required more that one “switch”, as she had a stubborn streak and just wouldn’t be “trained”. I was so appalled that I went home resolved never again to seek Christian parenting advice–and, yes, I AM a Christian.
I have come to the conclusion that any parenting advice written by humans, yet cloaked in biblical authority is highly suspect and could be extremely dangerous. One example of such is the Ezzo’s (Babywise) cult-like following that continues to this very day.
I was recently reminded of the dangers of this method, as I just had a friend “share” with me that she allowed her 2 week-old infant to cry for an hour before picking her up. After all, she had fed her, burped her, and changed her–what more could she possibly want? To be held by a mother’s loving arms, no doubt. I had explained to my friend when I visited her at the hospital, that the Ezzo’s method should not be applied to any newborn, and could have devastating consequences. I discussed with her some research that came out about eight years ago (conveniently when my Dd was born)that found that infants are capable of sleeping through the night once they reach about 11-12 lbs. Apparently, my friend remained unconvinced. How tragic! I guess I need to learn to argue better.
Anyway, my advice to Christian moms is this: Beware of “biblical-sounding” parenting advice which is doled out by uninspired humans–it can have lethal consequences. Pray for wisdom. Use the brain that God gave you, read His words straight from the source, and, please, do your own research where possible and do not dismiss the findings of well-designed scientific research studies that others perform, just because it does not suit your biases.
COD | Mar 23, 2006 | Reply
I sort of wish you had left it up. Doc’s reply would have been something worth framing
Doc | Mar 23, 2006 | Reply
Cindy, who’s blaming TOS for the death of a child? Perhaps you need a good curriculum in reading comprehension. The boycott is because TOS (the same people who own TOS own HSB) earn a living from the advertising for the Pearls. It’s money earned from the beating of infants, which has resulted in death and abuse. It’s no different than when Christians called for a HUGE boycott of American Girl last fall because of their association with Girl’s INC. Oh wait, it’s OKAY for Christians to censor material and have a rightwing agenda - it’s just not okay for anyone else. Right. Should I go on to list the other associative boycotts that Christians have called over the years? How about Disney because of their “gay day” association? Does being gay kill children? No. Does reading “Girls INC” kill children? No.
Dani | Mar 23, 2006 | Reply
Don’t worry Shannon, I won’t piss in your “phat” pool anymore. Clearly my views and opinions are not welcome here so there is no need to feel threatened.
Any parent with an emotional maturity level higher than the average thirteen-year-old can, with a proper vision and knowledge of the Pearl’s techniques, have happy obedient children.
Obviously, you all are confident in your own methods and you choose to be willfully ignorant of the truth, so I won’t be wasting my time here with such foolishness.
Peace Out!
Kelly | Mar 23, 2006 | Reply
oh my goodness dani…why would someone want to hear your opinion when, when affronted with opposing views, you respond with a hostile attitude and the exact opposite of what christians are supposed to be–do not think of yourself more highly than you ought…
i am on homeschool blogger currently but am planning a move…not because i want to be disassciated with the pearls, but because i want to be in neutral territory. it’s getting too stuffy there. i guess i didn’t realize the nature of the discussion until i got there and read more.
i largely agree with the other homeschoolers in their beliefs and convictions, though i am NOT a supporter of the pearls.
Boubiani | Mar 24, 2006 | Reply
I’m sure a lot of the Bible is taken out of context. Do you suppose when the Lord instructed us to use the Rod, it was not an actual physical implement, but rather a Rod of spiritual correction?
The Lord uses metaphors through out His word.
Lesa | Mar 26, 2006 | Reply
Lesa | Mar 27, 2006 | Reply
I typed my blog addy in wrong above!
You can also find more info about this topic on http://happyhomeschooler.blog-city.com/
Lesa
Ellie | Apr 7, 2006 | Reply
When the Pearls’ decided to make an appearence in the UK this month, I was intrigued by their assumptions that they had a wonderful key, nay, the only key to raising a child. So I read the book. My jaw is still recovering from it’s rapid descent to the floor. I’m not an anti-spanker by nature, I believe physical force may be employed in some instances. Ie. When my two year old touched a electrical outlet, his hand was smacked, I wanted immediate pain associated with dangerous thing. Him disagreeing with me or challenging my authority does not merit a smack. He was trying his boundaries, which was developmentally a good thing, he was progressing right on schedule.
I know Guantanamo Bay has confused alot of people, but really folks, torture is against the Geneva convention, and the Pearls’ do qualify. But just to make sure I wasn’t taking that one work out of context I read a bit more of their work (Debbie Pearls’ Helpmeet book.) and I was even MORE horrified if that were possible.
It will be hugely interesting to see how dysfunctional the adults are a couple more generations down. But to quote a very sage woman….my mom. “It’s not okay to hit.”
Rebekah Pearl Anast | Apr 10, 2006 | Reply
Are Michael and Debi Pearl “Guilty as Charged?”
My name is Rebekah Anast, I am the firstborn daughter of Michael and Debi Pearl, the authors of the best-selling book To Train Up a Child.
A handful of angry people have begun an outcry against Michael and Debi Pearl for the child-training principles in this book. These naysayers have also struck out against The Old Schoolhouse Magazine for refusing to reject the paid advertisement of the No Greater Joy Ministry materials, and for refusing to make a public statement of dissosociation.
Along with quoting out of context, verbalized anger, and false assumptions, they have attacked those associated with the Pearl family, and threatened to shake the fragile platform of homeschooling in the UK by going to the media with the sensational story that certain UK homeschool groups are hosting the infamous “extreme ritualistic child abuse advocators, Michael and Debi Pearl.”
In every society there are “movers and shakers,” those people who call the media, make the stories (or the stink, as the case may be) and bring about changes that effect the thousands of ambivalent and, often clueless, masses. Some of these movers and shakers have the good of the masses in mind, others are simply angry, irrational people that need attention and like to make a scene.
Unfortunately, the media thrives on these sensation-makers, and is quick to poison the waters of truth if the poison is offered on the silver platter of a “hot story.”
How do we combat the irrational and unfounded sensationalism that would poison the waters of our communities? With truth. If the media wants a story, give them the truth. Let them know that we are very aware of the lies and sensation being spread, but that we’re not afraid of it, because we know the truth.
These sensational story-tellers say that Michael and Debi Pearl teach child abuse, the subjection of women, and general injustice.
I would know (I am their daughter) whether their techniques are violent and unjust, or loving and temperate. I would know if the result is an emotionally damaged and fearful child, or a creative, successful, happy adult. I would know, yes, better than any one of these angry people, whether Michael and Debi Pearl are barbaric child abusers, or loving, successful parents.
Every type of abuse leaves evidence to prove its occurrence, whether it be a mark on the spirit or the body. Let me give you the evidence that is me:
I am 32 years old, married and the mother of three children. I am the happiest person I know, and my life is full of fruit; my own three very happy, balanced children who are completely sound in body and mind.
I have written articles, books, screenplays, and traveled the world for 4 years, meeting new people, eating new food, ministering to those in need, and loving life. I always returned to my favorite place and my favorite people… my family.
I married a wonderful man who is worth every moment of reverence and honor I give him; he is my best friend and only lover.
I have very few bad memories of childhood, all of which I can recall clearly; my dog dying, my hand getting cut on a fresh pine board, my brother being stung by bees, and my father’s grief over a friend’s suffering. That’s all that I can recall.
I remember only one spanking. I remember it because I laughed all the way through it, and so did my Dad. I had played a prank that was dangerous, but funny, and fully deserved a spanking for it, but my parents were unable to spank me without laughing. That is the only spanking I clearly remember. The others were so well-deserved my conscience was able to write off the memory once the deed was paid for.
I was never injured in body or spirit by the training I received. I was never “struck” in anger. I did receive non-injurous spankings on my fully clothed backside with a willow switch when I had clearly transgressed a known “law” of the house. These spankings did not leave bruises or abrasions, or emotional distress.
I learned by the gentlest way possible that foolishness has consequences and wise choices make life comfortable. This training has literally saved my life and I am eternally grateful to both my parents for using a literal rod to train my flesh to make wise choices.
My brothers and sisters were my best friends growing up. We did everything together; swimming, playing, working. We usually got in trouble together too, and when spankings were due, they were due all around. However, trouble was hard to find, as either Mom or Dad was almost always with us, joining in the fun, the projects, and the learning. From dancing in the rain, to building forts, to learning to ride a bike; they were there, so much a part of my life.
A person is innocent until proven guilty. I have proof that Michael and Debi Pearl are wise and loving parents: I am the proof, and every one of my siblings would agree with me.
Almost everything we (my parents) have ever written is available online for FREE on nogreaterjoy.org; and everything else is as inexpensive as possible while still allowing No Greater Joy to operate as a non-profit organization, geared toward helping thousands of parents and children.
A lot of information about the Pearls on the internet is simply taken out of context or completely misquoted. Look up the quotes on nogreaterjoy.org for yourself and make sure your source isn’t lying or misconstruing the truth.
It’s important to the homeschool movement that we be accountable for our views, instead of blindly following the loudest sensationalist, or giving them credibility of any kind.
Rebekah (Pearl) Anast
I give full permission to reprint or repost this article in it’s entirety in any format.
Cathryn | Aug 1, 2006 | Reply
I just wanted to voice my support for Dani and for Rebekah. For all those who attack these Godly methods of raising children, there are thousands more of us who quietly raise our children in the way that God has laid out in His Word. But like Christianity itself, this will always be under attack, as it is the only Truth.
Emily H. | Sep 6, 2006 | Reply
I think the proof of the goodness or lack thereof of the Pearls’ book is in the proverbial pudding: Rebekah Pearl. She obviously enjoyed her childhood and doesn’t feel she was abused. So it seems to me that that speaks volumes in favour of the Pearls’ methods.
Roxy | Oct 15, 2006 | Reply
The Pearls are dangerous. It doesn’t get more simple than that. Just because someone uses scripture to to backup ideas that are only the opinion of the author does not validate those same ideas. If not for the fact that we have the Holy Spirit to lead us in all things holy, then we could be held hostage by teachings like the Pearls. Debi’s book on marriage is a terror. I am glad to see that others are aware of her error. It gives me hope.
Bethany | Mar 27, 2007 | Reply
>>>Did you know they also advocate that you stay with your husband even if he is sexually abusing your children!!!!
Have you read their materials? We could debate many points, but on this issue the Pearls have taken a very clear position: If the husband is molesting the kids, and the wife is aware, she has both moral and legal responsibility to do something about it–i.e. turn him in. This was clearly and specifically addressed in Created to be His Help Meet (perhaps other places, too).
Glenys Hicks | May 20, 2007 | Reply
Not only that, Bethany but they advise a severely abused wife to suffer in silence. This is dangerous and I have the emotional and physical scars to prove that the Pearls advice on this is wrong. Here is my link: http://2bteachers.wordpress.com/2007/02/03/a-dangerous-book-created-to-be-his-helpmeet/
Tina | Jun 30, 2007 | Reply
The Rob in Hebrew is the Shebet. The Shebet was a tool used to guide sheep and not to beat them. I think some people have misunderstood the true meaning of what a ROD is and how a ROD was used in Biblical times. Proverbs was also a books of wisdom and not a book of rules, the saying were wise saying but by no means Law.
Punishing children with the ROD is not Biblical.
Roxy | Dec 20, 2007 | Reply
I thought I’d check back to see what has been written in the last year. I also reread the previous posts about the Pearls. To be honest I am glad to see that the Pearls did a good job raising their children. Their daughter Rebekah is living proof that they did something right.
But I would like to say something that no one has touched on yet. Some people want to take what they see as a good thing and pass it on to others as if it is a one-size-fits-all solution. This is the Pearls greatest error. The fact that they raised their own children well speaks well of them. But this one-fits-all approach to parenting does not have enough give.
Their children are not our children. Our lives are not theirs. So naturally, people will read the book and then attempt to implement the ideas through their own emotions, philosophies, and experiences. Ask a group of Christian women how they honor their husbands and you will find some things you would NEVER do. In fact, you would probably find some of their “honoring” distastefull. But to be fair, you might also get some good ideas too.
But the point is that one parent might switch a child for something that would not even register on the actions-that-require-a-switching list for many of us. Others may look the other way when discipline is clearly needed leaving us to wonder why that was allowed to go without correction. I am not an advocate of spanking per se. Like Ellie, I think a slap on the wrist is better than finding your child on the floor because he was electrocuted.
As a born again believer I just don’t see that the bible advocates spanking as a normal part of a Christian life. Our Heavenly Father does not discipline us that way. Everytme I chose to do something that is contrary to His Word does He find someway to physically punish me? No He does not. The best punishment that God employs is to allow us to have free will to chose to do right or wrong. The truth is that WE muck things up for ourselves then wind up calling to Him for help. I believe God chastises His own because the Word says He does. But I believe His chastisement is rare bedcause He sees that we do a good job of hurting ourselves. I hope to never have to suffer the direct chastisement of the hand of God.
Aside from sticking a finger in the electrical socket or drinking furniture polish I think that spanking as a child training tool is far overated by some and demonized by others. There is a balance which is, of course, hard to achieve. We will never agree where the line is either. By becoming polarized on an issue like spanking we aren’t likely to ever find that line.
Do I still think the Pearls are dangerous? Yes. Because they see themselves as having truth. And this truth is on an issue that can have devastating results. I visited their website today and found this:
[Punishment is not about training or correcting behavior; it is about returning “an eye for an eye.” The concept behind the principle of punishment is, “You caused pain and suffering in others, so you will receive pain and suffering as a means of paying for your wrongdoing.” ]
They do go on to say that a child under the age of three does not possess a command of the language, nor can he effectively think in terms of philosophy or principles and therefor cannot benefit from punishment.
As soon as my children were old enough to get into things I had to find ways to keep them from hurting themselves. It did not matter if they could speak or understand what was being told them. How many of us have to be convinced that a toddler understands what “no” means? Sure, it isn’t a full understanding but it is there. For instance: None of my children were allowed to hit, bite or scratch other kids. For goodness sakes, Babies learn to do those things in the church nursery or daycare. So I had to “punish” them by saying “no” when they would be mean to other kids. If they persisted it was then I had to find a way to redirect or invoke some kind of time out even if it became nap time. Honestly, just a “no” could provoke copius tears from my children. Who like being told no? But they also saw me tell other children “no” when I caught them being mean to them as well. OK, I call that “guiding” but I know some would call it punishing.
I digress. To train a child to think in an
eye-for-an-eye manner is scary. Words mean everything and the Pearls need to rethink how they are saying what mean to say. In my opinion the ultimate teacher is Jesus himself. He died for our sins. His grace means that we will never pay the price for those sins. We do not have have carte blanche to sin as much as we want because He chose to redeem us. So why do the Pearls teach this eye-for-an-eye methodology when Christ himself does not hold us to the same standard? I don’t get why they don’t get it.
Roxy | Dec 20, 2007 | Reply
I want to correct myself. God does not use our free will as a way to correct us. He allows the consequences of our own choices to teach us a lesson.
Kate Gibbons | May 17, 2008 | Reply
I homeschooled for a while although my children are now happily back at school. I totally agree with the right to homeschool and would fight tooth and nail to protect that right. However, there are many religious extremists who are openly selling literature that advocates whipping babies as young as 4 months old, most of them homeschoolers. THIS IS CHILD ABUSE. You cannot disguise it by declaring the bible instructs you to use the rod on your children. The Pearl’s in particular advocate plastic piping. I didn’t realise they had plastic piping when the bible was written.
Homeschooling is great for parents who want to spend that extra time with their children, provide a good education, have a child perhaps with learning difficulties or who is being bullied. However,it shouldn’t be used to cover up the isolation, indoctrination and abuse of children. Hitting your children with any instrument is abuse. Homeschooling is dominated by the religious right and sadly it reflects badly on those homeschoolers who are homeschooling for all the right reasons.
Kate Gibbons
Autopsy reveals child was tied
http://childabuseaustralia.wordpress.com/