"To Train Up A Child"

remsburgsgirl

http://www.examiner.com/article/another-couple-found-guilty-of-murder-for-parenting-by-to-train-up-a-child

This makes me wonder what kind of adults the surviving children become after being raised like this?

Should it be banned, this book?...I mean if you buy it to parent your kids to, then there's got to be something up with you!

Kettleson

There are a lot of crazy people out there, and very often they team up and have kids. Unfortunately that part of the process is not against the law.

woodoo

Jesus that's shocking. I went in to their website as i was going to tell them they are a pair of assh**les but it looks like you have to send them snail mail.

Killer Wench

I wonder how long it will take before this becomes a "ripped from the headlines" story for Law and Order: SVU.

geeky

It is a source of amazement that nobody has decided to inflict the kind of treatment that Michael Pearl advocates on him. Surely an oversight.

wp_rathead

Christ, some of their "discipline" techniques:

• Using plastic tubing to beat children, since it hurts a lot but leaves fewer marks to alert authorities
  
• Wearing the plastic tubing around the parent's neck as a constant reminder to obey
  
• "Swatting" babies as young as six months old with instruments such as "a 12-inch willowy branch," thinner plastic tubing or a wooden spoon
  
• "Blanket training" babies by hitting them with an instrument if they try to crawl off a blanket on the floor
  
• Beating older children with rulers, paddles, belts and larger tree branches
  
• "Training" children with pain before they even disobey, in order to teach total obedience
  
• Giving cold water baths, putting children outside in cold weather and withholding meals as discipline
  
• Hosing off children who have potty training accidents
  
• Inflicting punishment until a child is "without breath to complain."

Nodin

Killer Wench wrote: »

I wonder how long it will take before this becomes a "ripped from the headlines" story for Law and Order: SVU.

......as we type, I'd imagine, others are at work.

wp_rathead

A quote from the book:

You may have strong feelings that prevent you from spanking your child, but it is ignorance to claim that love is your motive. The God who made little children, and therefore knows what is best for them, has provided them parents to employ the rod in training up their children. To refrain from doing so, based on a claim of love, is an indictment against God himself. Your actions declare that either God does not desire what is best for your child or you know better than him.

Frightening

Nodin

wprathead wrote: »

A quote from the book:



Frightening

....these people need to meet the god who made the 12 gauge.

anncoates

Fcuking animals.

Red Nissan

Deleted.

Red Nissan

anncoates wrote: »

Moronic, even by the yardstick of AH.

Deleted.

Artful_Badger

Red Nissan wrote: »

I wouldn't agree, but the persecution of women and children is well enough documented around the globe where similar atrocities are tolerated.

The subject of whether parent's have the right to impose a manifesto on their children of this kind global in its implications.

This was a long period of physical torture resulting in murder. Bit different than teaching a kid a bit of nonsense.

remsburgsgirl

woodoo wrote: »

Jesus that's shocking. I went in to their website as i was going to tell them they are a pair of assh**les but it looks like you have to send them snail mail.

I have a feeling they wouldn't be phased at all by the hate mail they get

remsburgsgirl

I can't imagine the kids who are raised like this would turn out to be healthy adults

Red Nissan

Artful_Badger wrote: »

This was a long period of physical torture resulting in murder. Bit different than teaching a kid a bit of nonsense.

OK. I did not read far enough. I withdraw my comments.

My name is URL

remsburgsgirl wrote: »

I can't imagine the kids who are raised like this would turn out to be healthy adults

They'd be lucky to reach adulthood by the sound of it.

anncoates

Red Nissan wrote: »

Deleted.

Fair enough.

Deleted my post quoting yours.

A child abuse manual, written by sadists for sadists.

dark crystal

This is a book advocating the torture and abuse of children - why on earth was it ever allowed to be published, let alone sold?

fathead82

What a pair of sickos.To make it worse,this couple went to the trouble of adopting a child to treat her like that & let her die in the back yard. Nobody can be stupid enough to believe a book that advises you to hit babies as young as 6 months.
I hope they rot in jail for the rest of their lives.

Sala

Disgusting. As an aside this bit jumped out to me:

adopted daughter Hana

I would have thought prospective adoptive parents would be assessed. Apparently she was only adopted in 2008 - are there no safeguards to prevent nut-jobs adopting children from abroad?

silverharp

if the kids make it to adulthood they will have a chance "to train up an ageing parent" at some stage one would hope. Americans and religion don't mix

minidazzler

Oh look, sociopaths invoking the name of God to live out their sociopathic fantasies. That's a new one.

I hope Micheal and Debi Pearl die quite painfully. They deserve nothing better for advocating violence against children under the guise of "parenting".

Red Nissan

silverharp wrote: »

Americans and religion don't mix

Humans and religion don't mix. That would be my take.

wolfpawnat

Candie wrote: »

A child abuse manual, written by sadists for sadists.

I feel that they would be the first to say how horrible they had it were prison authorities to do the same to them. I know we cannot advocate violence here, but sometimes I wish we could make exceptions!!!

Sala wrote: »

Disgusting. As an aside this bit jumped out to me: I would have thought prospective adoptive parents would be assessed. Apparently she was only adopted in 2008 - are there no safeguards to prevent nut-jobs adopting children from abroad?

The saying Street Angels, house devils comes to my mind. It is easy to seem lovely to the world for an interview.

Lapin

woodoo wrote: »

Jesus that's shocking. I went in to their website as i was going to tell them they are a pair of assh**les but it looks like you have to send them snail mail.

I wouldn't even go near their website.

They'd count the number of hits it receives as a justification for their existance and spin the figure in a twisted manner to demonstrate their perceived popularity.

Sala

Sala wrote: »

Disgusting. As an aside this bit jumped out to me: I would have thought prospective adoptive parents would be assessed. Apparently she was only adopted in 2008 - are there no safeguards to prevent nut-jobs adopting children from abroad?

As far as I know there are a number of Christian adoption agencies who probably had a higher tolerance for strict biblical interpretations of discipline.

They probably toned down the sadism enough to appear somewhat normal for their assessments, although they must have been miserably inadequate to miss these gems.

Femme_Fatale

I wonder do some people adopt/foster to take out their sick violence fantasies on the children? Not the first case at all of barbarism towards a child by their adoptive parents. E.g. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/gloucestershire/6449313.stm

Those poor little munchkins

My name is URL

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I wonder do some people adopt/foster to take out their sick violence fantasies on the children? Not the first case at all of barbarism towards a child by their adoptive parents. E.g. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/gloucestershire/6449313.stm

You could ask the same about couples who have their own kids. I'm sure the incidences of neglect and abuse by those people far outweigh that of adoptive parents.

Femme_Fatale

My name is URL wrote: »

You could ask the same about couples who have their own kids. I'm sure the incidences of neglect and abuse by those people far outweigh that of adoptive parents.

I know, but why go to the trouble of adoption/fostering only to carry out not discipline, but torture on the child(ren).

My name is URL

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I know, but why go to the trouble of adoption/fostering only to carry out not discipline, but torture on the child(ren).

It's a somewhat simplistic way to view the subject, imo. A better question might be in regards to how they ever granted permission to adopt, given that thorough screening and reliance on character references are supposed to play such big parts in it all.

Red Nissan

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I know, but why go to the trouble of adoption/fostering only to carry out not discipline, but torture on the child(ren).

In light of the context of the abuse it's clear [possibly] that God had not blessed them [he perhaps knew better] but they were nonetheless compelled by god [in their minds] to obey, so circumventing natural selection they adopted [juxtaposition] in spite of god but compelled by god at the same time.

pharmaton

how does that kind of stuff get published?

Red Nissan

pharmaton wrote: »

how does that kind of stuff get published?

Some of it is in the Bible.

My name is URL

pharmaton wrote: »

how does that kind of stuff get published?

Same way any shit published. One person spouting it, thousands willing to listen and someone in the middle cashing in on it all.

clairefontaine

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/10/us-usa-adoption-homicide-idUSBRE98900020130910

This family had their own biological children. IF you do more reading around the web, there are articles which claim they targeted the adopted child, like some kind of scapegoat.

Honestly I think Putin was right not to allow Russian kids to be adopted by US families.

Femme_Fatale

clairefontaine wrote: »

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/10/us-usa-adoption-homicide-idUSBRE98900020130910

This family had their own biological children. IF you do more reading around the web, there are articles which claim they targeted the adopted child, like some kind of scapegoat.

That's the kind of thing I meant. It might have seemed kneejerk and rabblerousing of me, but I did put thought into it - and there are people whose sickness know no bounds, so I reckon it's possible.

Honestly I think Putin was right not to allow Russian kids to be adopted by US families.

Well no, I don't think a miniscule minority of adoptive parents make Putin right.

remsburgsgirl

I get the whole freedom of speech thing...but I still don't understand how this book is allowed on the bookshelves...I mean it is a manual on abuse...surely it is advocating the breaking of some laws on child abuse/neglect?

Red Nissan

remsburgsgirl wrote: »

I get the whole freedom of speech thing...but I still don't understand how this book is allowed on the bookshelves...I mean it is a manual on abuse...surely it is advocating the breaking of some laws on child abuse/neglect?

Agreed, add the Bible and the Quran.

meoklmrk91

I am not a proponent of censorship in anyway shape or form, but this is one book that should not be in the public domain, it's dangerous, written by nuts, for nuts. What would be fantastic is if they could do the Pearls for accessory to murder. What kind of sick people would write a torture handbook for babies and small children? What kind of sick people would buy it and put it into practice? I bloody hate religious nuts, it never ends well.

pharmaton

remsburgsgirl wrote: »

I get the whole freedom of speech thing...but I still don't understand how this book is allowed on the bookshelves...I mean it is a manual on abuse...surely it is advocating the breaking of some laws on child abuse/neglect?

I am actually astounded to think there aren't laws that can prohibit the sharing of that kind of material

Red Nissan

pharmaton wrote: »

I am actually astounded to think there aren't laws that can prohibit the sharing of that kind of material

It's protected under religious freedoms.

Femme_Fatale

I don't see a need for "I'm pro free speech/anti censorship" disclaimers. This sh1t is an example of when the latter is sometimes needed, and the former is sometimes not a good thing. Frankly I'm far more concerned about the people on the receiving end of free speech being abused and censorship not being implemented when there's downright violations as a result.

Red Nissan wrote: »

Agreed, add the Bible and the Quran.

We get it - you're anti religion. I grew up with a bit of religion - I am not scarred and I made my own decision in relation to religion eventually.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

That is just sick.
I cannot understand how such sick and twisted shíte can be allowed on open sale!

Red Nissan

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

That is just sick.
I cannot understand how such sick and twisted shíte can be allowed on open sale!

I believe the source is the Bible. And I actually agree with you.

Femme_Fatale

silverharp wrote: »

Americans and religion don't mix

Ah here... Any fundamentalist anywhere and religion don't mix.

pharmaton

Red Nissan wrote: »

It's protected under religious freedoms.

its'a book about parenting? I realise you're making the point that it's a book written by 'christians' but I somehow doubt it's endorsed by any religious group specifically. Please tell me it isn't

liliq

pharmaton wrote: »

its'a book about parenting? I realise you're making the point that it's a christian book but I somehow doubt it' endorsed by any religious group specifically. Please tell me it isn't

The pearls have their own religious organisation, I think

pharmaton

I give up