Books that advocate child abuse

[Cairber]

A couple of books on chid raising have been brought to my attention because they, without a doubt, advocate child abuse. One such books is To Train Up a Child (Pearl). This book states:

"One of our girls who developed mobility early had a fascination with crawling up the stairs. 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. "

Other books like this are the "Babywise" series by Ezzo, which give parents advice such as "flicking the cheek" of a 6 month old who refuses to stop playing with their food in their heightchair. If they don't, you are to slap their hand and put them to bed or in their crib without food. His books are full of other examples.


Is it a violation of first amendment rights to ban these books from bookstores? would I be no better than a book burner to fight to get these books off shelves?

[General Zod]

Is it a violation of first amendment rights to ban these books from bookstores? would I be no better than a book burner to fight to get these books off shelves?

It depends on how you go about banning it, iirc. It would be a violation if the government were to forbid their sales in stores, but if you petitioned the stores themselves to not sell them, you wouldn't be violating anyone's rights.

[Darth Wong]

I guess the law doesn't allow us to enforce the proper response, which would be to beat the shit out of the authors and ask how they like a taste of their own medicine.

[LadyTevar]

When I was growing up, that wouldn't have caused anyone to bat an eye. It's not child abuse, folks, it's Disclipline, something that several of the little shits running around my office today fuckin' need! You do NOT bribe a child into good behavior by saying "be good and we'll get icecream" when they're screamign their fuckin' heads off!

[Big Orange]

I don't think attacking babies and small children is right but I can tolerate slapping teenagers over the age of 12; they're much closer to full adulthood and they're also far more aware of their behavioural conduct.

[General Zod]

I don't think attacking babies and small children is right but I can tolerate slapping teenagers over the age of 12; they're much closer to full adulthood and they're also far more aware of their behavioural conduct.

If it's gotten to the point where you have to slap a teenager over the age of 12 as punishment, then frankly you've failed as a parent.

[Big Orange]

Well some teenagers are pricks no matter how well or badly they brought up (nacent sociopaths?) and by the age of 14 you're only a few years shy of full adulthood anyway and not strictly a child by then. And I'm suggesting the restrained slapping teenaged school kids who are behaving like complete prats.

[Darth Wong]

When I was growing up, that wouldn't have caused anyone to bat an eye. It's not child abuse, folks, it's Disclipline, something that several of the little shits running around my office today fuckin' need! You do NOT bribe a child into good behavior by saying "be good and we'll get icecream" when they're screamign their fuckin' heads off!

Bullshit. Anyone who uses a switch to whip their kids is guilty of child abuse, and I don't care how many nuggets of deep-fried country old-time wisdom you choose to hurl my way; it won't change the fact that there is not a shred of evidence that such behaviour leads to better-adjusted children. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Hell, we don't even recommend that people train dogs that way, and people are recommending we hit four month old babies? That's the biggest pile of steaming bullshit I've seen in a long time.

[Big Orange]

The difference between slapping a 4 year old and a 14 year old is that a 4 year old does not fully comprehend himself, other people or his surroundings yet. If he doesn't understand that pissing on the carpet is wrong then it would view an angry parent that's slapping him for punishment as a very violent person that is essentially attacking him for no reason (from his undeveloped point of view).

[Darth Wong]

The difference between slapping a 4 year old and a 14 year old is that a 4 year old does not fully comprehend himself, other people or his surroundings yet. If he doesn't understand that pissing on the carpet is wrong then it would view an angry parent that's slapping him for punishment as a very violent person that is essentially attacking him for no reason (from his undeveloped point of view).

It's worse than that; the quote in the OP describes hitting a four month old girl with a switch. Hell, if you showed up at a dog obedience class with a switch the instructor would tell you to get lost, and here we have neanderthal morons recommending we do it to four month old babies!

[LadyTevar]

When I was growing up, that wouldn't have caused anyone to bat an eye. It's not child abuse, folks, it's Disclipline, something that several of the little shits running around my office today fuckin' need! You do NOT bribe a child into good behavior by saying "be good and we'll get icecream" when they're screamign their fuckin' heads off!

Bullshit. Anyone who uses a switch to whip their kids is guilty of child abuse, and I don't care how many nuggets of deep-fried country old-time wisdom you choose to hurl my way; it won't change the fact that there is not a shred of evidence that such behaviour leads to better-adjusted children. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Hell, we don't even recommend that people train dogs that way, and people are recommending we hit four month old babies? That's the biggest pile of steaming bullshit I've seen in a long time.

Better-adjusted? Can't say.
Better behaved in public? Hell yes.

If it'd been me pulling half this shit, I'd have been yanked up and dragged intot he bathroom for a swat to the bottom. It taught me to behave, it taught me what was and wasnt acceptable in public.

[Big Orange]

Is a "switch" an especially vicious looking stick (for clarification)?

And it must be a especially old parenting book if it encourages to subject an uncomprehending infant to random and moderately brutal disciplinary violence. Honestly, the further you go back into the past the more people in general act like ignorant and cruel fuckwits.

[SirNitram]

Is a "switch" an especially vicious looking stick (for clarification)?

Pretty much. There may be a place for some physical punishments, but a switch on a 4 month old is simply insane; they don't comprehend much of anything at that age, especially not the connection between actions and why their protector is hitting them with a stick.

[Surlethe]

Is a "switch" an especially vicious looking stick (for clarification)?

A switch is just a lithe stick which you use for switching -- i.e., spanking. It delivers a little nasty sting. Think of it like a stiff whip.

My parents never spanked before age three or four, as I recall, and when they did, they used wooden spoons, not whips, switches, or their hands (well, maybe their hands once or twice, but not regularly). The big thing they did when they spanked me was explain exactly why they were spanking me, reassure me that they still loved me, and hold and comfort me after the spanking. You can't do all that to a four-month-old who doesn't understand anything and can't communicate understanding, remorse, or repentence.

[Darth Wong]

When I was growing up, that wouldn't have caused anyone to bat an eye. It's not child abuse, folks, it's Disclipline, something that several of the little shits running around my office today fuckin' need! You do NOT bribe a child into good behavior by saying "be good and we'll get icecream" when they're screamign their fuckin' heads off!

Bullshit. Anyone who uses a switch to whip their kids is guilty of child abuse, and I don't care how many nuggets of deep-fried country old-time wisdom you choose to hurl my way; it won't change the fact that there is not a shred of evidence that such behaviour leads to better-adjusted children. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Hell, we don't even recommend that people train dogs that way, and people are recommending we hit four month old babies? That's the biggest pile of steaming bullshit I've seen in a long time.

Better-adjusted? Can't say.
Better behaved in public? Hell yes.

And you have studies to prove this steaming pile of bullshit that you're spewing? And to explain damning studies like this? And to explain how the fuck a four-month old child is going to learn anything but fear and anxiety from being struck with a switch by her parents?

If it'd been me pulling half this shit, I'd have been yanked up and dragged intot he bathroom for a swat to the bottom. It taught me to behave, it taught me what was and wasnt acceptable in public.

And what if it's possible to teach that WITHOUT whipping a four month old baby with a switch? Wouldn't it be fucking stupid and immoral to do so in that case?

[Pick]

Sorry, I think the best parenting method is mututal respect and explanation. Most children are naturally altruistic, and if you explain to them why they should act a certain way and why that is the right way, many will listen. Personally, I don't like children, but I'm surprisingly good at dealing with the ones I've met thus far.

If a kid still misbehaves, I think that a punishment should be formulated that is nonviolent but nevertheless frustrating for the child. Sitting in a corner, for instance, is not fun, and gives them time to reflect on why they are there.

[Cairber]

I agree that there needs to be firm discipline of children; however, study after study say that spanking or using other corporal punishment under the age of two leads to worse behavior later in life. The AAP has stated and restated this 3 or 4 times now. And their studies didn't even look into something as extreme as hitting with an object, they focused solely on the AAP definition of spanking (open hand). (info from AAP's YOur Child Birth to Age Five)

A parent has to ask themselves....what is the child doing that deserves punishment. Exploring stairs, as is the example in the book, is something children will do. You can't expect a four year old to comprehend that they shouldn't climb the stairs. There should be a gate there....no need for hitting with a tree branch!!

Ezzo, on the other hand, is so bad he earned a press release from the AAP against his books, which have resulted in failure to thrive in many children and, in a few cases, death.

[Cairber]

ghetto edit- that should read "four month old" not "four year old"

[Darth Wong]

The study I linked to earlier showed that early childhood physical punishment is a risk factor for spousal abuse later in life. And why shouldn't it be? After all, if you've learned that you modify behaviour with beatings from such a young age that you couldn't even speak yet, it will be pretty hard to remove that mentality from yourself later. So if your little wife does something bad, WHACK across the head, right? That's how you teach her not to overcook your dinner!

[Cairber]

Is a "switch" an especially vicious looking stick (for clarification)?

And it must be a especially old parenting book if it encourages to subject an uncomprehending infant to random and moderately brutal disciplinary violence. Honestly, the further you go back into the past the more people in general act like ignorant and cruel fuckwits.

It was published in 1994.

[Big Orange]

It was published in 1994.

More like 1894.

And what happened to Ezzo again? Was he repremanded because his books suggested to attack small children?

[Cairber]

Here are some quotes from the first book:

"If (babies) are mad, switch them. Don't let your child stay unhappy. Meet the real needs and make their selfish crying an unrewarding experience." p.87

"Just think! A child who never begs, whines or cries for anything! We have raised five whineless children. Think of the convenience..." p.60

"For the under one year old, a little, ten- to twelve-inch long, willowy branch (stripped of any knots that might break the skin) about one-eigth 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." p 47

[Cairber]

It was published in 1994.

More like 1894.

And what happened to Ezzo again? Was he repremanded because his books suggested to attack small children?

Ezzo recommended putting infants on a feeding schedule (his premise basically was that babies are manipulative and you need to quell that). His feeding schedule lead to FFT papers, dehydration, and deaths. So, the AAP acted.

[Big Orange]

Why do they assume babies are selfish out of spite, when they need to be fed, waited on and protected by any responsible parent at all costs? Ezzo and that other author are both fucking nuts!

[LadyTevar]

Ok... Mea culpa. I read 4months as 4 Years.

HOWEVER... I still believe that a 4 year old can and should be spanked if they are misbehaving. This is partially because of the misbehaving 3-7 year olds that I've seen in and out of my office this day, who could each and every one of them use a trip to the bathroom and a good paddling.

As for a switch? Go outside and pull a small branch off a low tree, about 2ft long and smaller around than your pinky (or a child's thumb). Bring it back to your parent, and turn around (or drop the drawers) so they can give you a switchin. God help you if you try to be cute and bring back a switch that's too small. It doubles the lashes.

I was 7-8yrs old when I was told to fetch a switch the first time. I was 10 when Mom and Dad started using the leather belt. So yes, I'm biased about spankings, becuase I know they worked on me and my brothers, adn they're working on my nephews when 'Time Out' just doesn't cover it.