Studying what I've been studying over the past few months has been difficult. Another word for it is "trying" but it's gone as far as downright terrifying. I did not expect this information to hit me as hard as it did. Being able to personally identify with a lot of what we're learning about has been scary as fuck, since I've been avoiding thinking about these things as much as I could for as long as I could. I finally started to address it and it's been the best thing that I ever did (but at times has felt like the worst thing that's ever happened to me) but this is a topic for another post.
In my current voluntary-distraction-from-exams phase, I've discovered and have been reading extensively The Worst Things For Sale -- which is hilarious, and I highly recommend it. I do this in stores often, especially when visiting the States; I pick up items and scoff at whoever thought a particular item would be a good and necessary thing for people to have. I usually take pictures. And I am usually the only one who finds it funny. But now I know I'M NOT ALONE. I'm digressing here.
In perusing this hilarious website I happened upon an entry regarding a book about "discipline" entitled How To Raise Up A Child. I was a bit scared of what I would find in the reviews. But I am glad I decided to look into it, because this is the exact reason I am getting into the profession of social service work. Reading the reviews on the Amazon item page was also something I dreaded -- thinking there would only be reviews from those singing its praises, testifying about how fantastic the Pearls' methods were, and how it worked for them. To my relief, there seemed to be more warnings to not purchase the book than there were reviews advocating its use. Faith in humanity slightly restored.
Then in one review someone mentioned Lydia Schatz. I looked it up and was amazed that I didn't hear about this story -- or maybe I had, and never looked into it further and simply forgot. Either way, stories like this will now stick in my mind forever as evidence to bring forth whenever someone naively expresses the belief that child abuse doesn't happen anymore. That people have moved past it. Or that everyone knows it's wrong.
Anderson Cooper (bless his gorgeous heart) and another reporter from CNN profiled the Schatz case as Lydia's adopted parents were being sentenced. They spoke with an attorney as well as the authors of the aforementioned ridiculous book, Micheal and Debi Pearl, in this news segment.
What infuriates me is their insistence that abuse can be helpful. That it's beneficial to break a child's will. To hit a toddler until they stop whimpering, for as long as that may take. This is the mindset that killed Lydia Schatz; why? Because she mispronounced a word for fuck's sake. A great blog post with quotes from the book can be found here.
This book is dangerous material for anyone who isn't familiar with child development, which is unfortunately the reality for a lot of fundamentalist religious people. When the only education you get is Bible-based, you get a very ancient methodological basis for your life. We've learned a lot about people since the Bible was written, and this needs to be taken into account. A parent needs to know what behaviours are appropriate for children from ages 0-10 at the very least. They need to know what to expect as normal, childish behaviour -- that which any child of their age would do. Certain behaviours are exploratory, or for fun -- because that's what children do. They explore their fucking worlds by reaching for things or putting things in their mouths, and we should only stop them when their safety is in jeopardy (or maybe when we don't want them drooling on our $600 phones). And that's just it -- you can stop them, and explain why you stopped them. Kids are a lot smarter than we give them credit for. Explain your reasoning in a way they can understand. Distinguish this behaviour from purposefully defiant behaviour -- that which is meant to test your boundaries. Or if they're older, it might be to purposefully piss you off (some kids think this is really funny, and can you blame them? You probably look hilarious when you're mad).
A few years ago I was shopping in a large store with a friend and her then 3-year-old son. As a single mother she was able to be very precise in her disciplinary methods (not abusive, for the record). She could practice consistency and control to an amazing degree because she was always with her son, all the time as a mom who worked from home. When she and I stopped to look at something, her son took off running at full tilt towards the far end of the aisle. I of course expressed some slight concern, but she didn't look bothered -- she just said "Oh, he knows to stop where I can see him." I looked over and was astonished to see him stop abruptly at the end of the aisle, turn around and smile his adorable huge smile at us both. This kid is three years old and he knows to stop running before he gets into an area in which his mother cannot see him. How did he know this? She explained it to him. It's about safety. If she were to not explain that part to him, and just do the whole "because I said so!" then it becomes about control. Then, of course he is going to run away where you can't see him and watch you freak the fuck out because it's hilarious. Don't just expect your kids to listen to you about everything, all the time, without explaining why. Again, kids are pretty fucking smart and a lot smarter than we give them credit for. It starts early, too -- when your kid throws a toy off his high chair onto the floor and watches you pick it up for him, over and over? That is hilarious, and he realizes he can control you in that way. Don't slap him for it -- just don't pick up the toy, and he will eventually learn that when something falls off of a surface, it's then out of his reach, so maybe he shouldn't throw it away if he actually wants to play with something while he's in his high chair.
I'm rambling now, but I'm trying to make a point -- there is a better way to make your child understand the world than hitting them. Spanking was not a disciplinary method in our household. From a young age my mom tried her very best to instill favourable personality traits in us through basic Christian teachings (to me they're just basic guidelines for being a good person, but whatever): be nice, treat others how you would wish to be treated, don't do things that are self-serving/don't be selfish, share and give back to others, don't be concerned with things like revenge, practice unconditional love and forgiveness, and other basic things that amount to: don't be an asshole, and do the right thing because it's the right thing to do. And while these traits may have led to me being a timid doormat who took a whole lot of shit from other kids growing up, I'm glad I got past that stage to become a person who actually cares about others (and increasingly, myself).
Spanking was a rare thing for my mom -- it usually happened when she was not okay, and only when we did something really bad, and when we were at the age where we could be snotty, purposefully talking back and occasionally being jerks to each other and her as well. She hated that because it showed disrespect, and probably made her think she didn't do a good enough job raising us, which was probably a scary thought for her. We always were still sent to our rooms, and we always talked about it after. And we didn't just get the "it's for your own good, so quit your fucking whining" spiel. I got the "it hurt me to do that to you, but your actions were hurtful to me too. When you talk to me like that it feels like you don't care about me, and that you don't love me. If you love me, act like it in everything that you do." This still is something I practice today. Don't say something that can hurt someone's feelings even when you're angry. Saying what you mean and meaning what you say is a big deal that sounds a lot simpler than it is. If we're fighting and you are so frustrated with me that you (for example) tell me to just go, get the fuck outta here, then I'm fucking leaving end of story. But later when you say "Why did you leave? Well I only said that because I was so mad..." So if you didn't fucking mean it, don't say it motherfucker! Anyway.
In short, abuse still happens. And it is usually because a parent does not know of any other method of discipline. Or they may have half-heartedly tried a more gentle method that didn't produce results that they were satisfied with. Probably because they tried it too late, or weren't consistent enough. Good disciplinary basics dictate that the consequence must come directly after the unwanted behaviour, and it must be consistent. Otherwise the child cannot connect the two events as being related and therefore it will be pretty fucking hard for them to learn that a certain behaviour will have certain consequences. You can't let them sometimes get away with it. Explanations for your discipline are always necessary -- make it perfectly clear why what they did is wrong or unacceptable behaviour.
There is always a better way than hitting/spanking/striking with objects. It should absolutely not be your go-to method of discipline for everything. Regardless if the Pearls have had what they measure as "success" in their methods, and regardless if they don't think that they take it too far, it is a dangerous line to skirt. You're potentially creating so many more problems in this little person that they will carry for the rest of their lives. To recommend that you hit a child until you break their will is not okay. Should we hit grown-ups until their wills are broken? No. So let's not do it to our kids, alright?
No comments:
Post a Comment