Showing posts with label discipline (child). Show all posts
Showing posts with label discipline (child). Show all posts

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

About Domestic Abuse of Hanna Williams



For those who are following events concerning Hana Williams' death and her adoptive parents' conviction, Kathryn Joyce has just written another excellent article.  I'm still so deeply affected by this that I just recommend that readers just link over to Slate online to read Joyce's new article.  I could embed a snippet here, but I couldn't figure out what to choose.

I will borrow from Why Not Train Up a Child's post about the article, however:
The above mentioned article is perfect for sharing with any politicians or celebrities who might be willing to put pressure on Amazon.com to remove the book, To Train Up A Child.  If you can’t think of anyone, here is an idea from StopSpanking.org
Maureen McCauley Evans continues to write excellent articles concerning the aftermath as well.  Follow this link to the "Hana Williams" tagged articles to continue to read her poignant pieces about Hana, the trial, how this affects adoption/adoption related practices, and a compassionate thoughts about so many ways that this tragedy affects so many different groups of people.

Hermana Linda also faithfully posts updates and links to everything related to Michael Pearl.  

I am so grateful for all of these women who continue to do faithfully bring attention to this issue, with grace and compassion which I so appreciate because of the difficulty of the subject matter.


Tuesday, October 29, 2013

An Open Message to Judge Susan Cook About the Williams' Sentencing: The Development of the Perfect Storm

Sentencing was just handed down today, following the guilty verdicts of the Williams Family parents in Skagit County, Washington. They were both found guilty of abuse charges for their adopted children as well as manslaughter charges, with an additional charge of “Homicide by Abuse” for the mother only. The jury could not come to a consensus on the same charge for the father, and it was subsequently dropped – a special charge reserved for those who are implicated in the death of children age thirteen years and younger. (A challenge of Hana Alemu Williams' age played a large role in the case presented by the defense teams for both parents to avoid the implications of this charge.)

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

A Film that Helps Us Understand Why Pearl Becomes Appealing: How do parents get caught up in extreme practices?

Grieving parent post-exit
A few years ago, I attended a professional conference that dealt with addiction which featured John Bradshaw as one of the speakers. I didn't like his old PBS series on codependency and families, but in recent years, I've found his lectures and books enlightening. He points out well, much like Alice Miller does, that corporal punishment in particular destroys critical thinking and makes a person ripe for manipulation. In a talk, much of which referred back to his own history of abuse, he ended up mentioning Focus on the Family and Richard Fugate as examples of ideologues who recommend abusive practices in their books. I approached him after the lecture and told him that his examples paled in comparison to that of Michael Pearl. Just because of Bradshaw's facial expression when I told him about Lydia Schatz, I ended up surrounded by a crowd of professionals, primarily social workers and licensed counselors. When I told them about the loyal following Pearl garners, they looked at me in disbelief. I told them that apart from either a cult model (which most of them understood as only only the inadequate and antiquated “Stockholm Syndrome”) or apart from what is often like the habituation within domestic abuse relationships, you cannot fully understand the phenomena.

Homeschooling, Hana Williams and the "Rod of Man"

The Williams Trial resulting in the manslaughter and assault charges against the parents of thirteen year old Ethiopian adoptee Hana Alemu Williams continues to generate much discussion. Maureen Evans who closely followed the trial noted that the sentencing hearing was postponed but is now scheduled for the morning of October 29th. Likely owing to the complexity and expense of the case, the Skagit County District Attorney's Office has decided to drop the additional, special “homicide by abuse” charge against Larry Williams. The jury found Carri Williams guilty of this special charge reserved for younger children, but they could not find Larry guilty of the same charge beyond reasonable doubt. Larry will like be required to serve in the neighborhood of fifteen years in prison, and Carri will have to serve a minimum of 27 years and as many as 37 years in prison for the additional guilty verdict of “homicide by abuse.”

Monday, September 9, 2013

Was Hana Williams Just a Casualty in the Quiverfull Culture War? Establishing the Landscape of Dehumanization in Missionary Adoption


Today, we may hear a verdict in the Williams Trial, determining the fate of Larry and Carri Williams of Scagit County, Washington. 

The jury must make a host of decisions about the nature of the harm suffered by the two children they adopted from Ethiopia – Immanuel and Hana. Among other considerations, they must determine beyond reasonable doubt whether Hana was sixteen or thirteen, the degree of the abuse/neglect that the children suffered, whether the parents did so in ignorance, and whether their actions directly caused Hana's death in May 2011. This previous post briefly explores the background in greater detail.

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Under Much Grace Names “Great Mercy Women” in the Last Hours of the Williams Trial


In previous posts, I've talked about the very strong female role models in my life as a young Christian. One of them I would call formidable. I decided at a rather young age that I was quite impressed with some very impressive nurses. One was a young missionary nurse who served in what is now the Congo with the Assemblies of God. She talked about the amazing and miraculous things that she did that made a remarkable difference in the lives of others. At the age of 22, I had the honor of accompanying her on a short-term trip, but I learned that she, Dr. Joann Butrin, now holds an impressive role as Director of International Missions for the Assemblies of God. The other early role model was a health educator for whom my mother worked when I was in elementary school, a PhD nurse who impressed me very much. She was also the wife of a local Moravian minister, and she spoke of the struggles that her young family faced on the mission field when her husband did foreign missions work. I wanted to be such a person, and I wanted to help to bind up the wounded and to set at liberty those who were bruised. In so doing, I would have an opportunity to tell people why I was motivated to care for them – to share with them the love of God and the comfort that others had shown to me.



My parents desired for me to attend a private college nursing program, despite our family's limited resources. I'd gone to a private Christian high school and was uncomfortable about transitioning into the real world at the tender age of sixteen. Messiah College had a nursing program, but it was new and not yet accredited with the American Nurse's Association which could cause problems if I wanted to transfer licensure to another State. During a year of community college where I took many basic classes, they decided that the two year program at a local Sisters of Mercy college would provide me with the most advantage and economy. I could be an RN in an associates degree program in only two years, but I could then easily finance the remaining classes I needed to earn a BSN at the same institution. I consider the school to be one of the best in the Philadelphia area, and it produced quite a number of “movers and shakers” in the profession. In addition to the excellent reputation for nursing education, it was also small, and the on campus population was approximately 98% female. I also took comfort in learning nursing as a ministry from Christians as opposed to going to a school like Penn State where I would have had classes with at least 200 other students, learning the ministry of nursing from a purely secular perspective.

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Live Information from the Courtroom: Larry and Carri Williams Verdict Begins Deliberation Today

Follow Gina Cole of the Skagit Valley Herald who is "tweeting"  from the courtroom as the jury deliberates the verdicts for the parents of the thirteen year old Ethiopian adoptee who died from hypothermia and malnutrition in May of 2011.  The couple also allegedly abused and neglected their other Ethiopian adopted son, Immanuel, who testified about his experiences in open court during the month of August.





Read more in this previous post which lays out a framework of the history of the case and the ideology that played a part in the mindset of the parents.  And a prayer for all of us.

Visit Why Not Train a Child? and Light of Day Stories for more information and compelling thoughts about the proceedings and for a more extensive history of these events.


Late Entry 9:30PM EST:

Monday, September 2, 2013

Awaiting the Verdicts in the Williams Trial: Another Michael Pearl/To Train Up A Child Associated Death


* Trigger Alert for those who were previously abused. *


My thoughts keep drifting off to the late Hana Alemu “Williams” who died from neglect and abuse at age thirteen under the care of her evangelical Christian parents who homeschooled her. I'm also deeply concerned about her surviving adopted brother, a fellow Ethiopian named Immanuel who is now twelve years old.  I was surprised to learn yesterday that the Williams' defense team rested their case on this past Friday.   Late Edit 2025:  Both parents were convicted for her death and are currently serving long prison sentences.

Following the death of two other adopted children as a consequence of a system of allegedly Biblical corporal punishment, it was Hana's death that finally compelled me to attend a meeting of the International Cultic Studies Association after more than a decade of procrastinating. I was deeply honored that Janet Heimlich (author of Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Religious Child Maltreatment) was able to attend my presentation there concerning how some sectors of evangelical patriarchy use ideology to vilify both women and children, as well as how this vilification can result in physical abuse, morbidity, and mortality.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Michael Pearl or these deaths, I will again revisit this subject, hopefully offering you a helpful synopsis. I elect not to address the Pearl-related death of four year old Sean Paddock who died of asphyxia in 2006 because his case is rather different than these other two more recent ones. I will also refer you to this post about the death of Lydia Schatz for more details. (Her parents, who believed that they were providing their daughter with better opportunities, were alive in Liberia at the time of her death, as Kathryn Joyce reports in her book, The Child Catchers.)   I've also written a long series of posts about the ideological pressures used against these homeschooling parents and the moral disengagement that results from the thought reform promoted through the writings and among the followers of Michael Pearl. Also note this list of all posts discussing harm to children as a consequence of religiously motivated discipline programs for children with a focus on Pearl, including off-site links to additional history, information, and resources.


Comparing and Contrasting the Williams and Schatz Families

Hana died in her Washington State home as a consequence of profound neglect and physical abuse at the age of thirteen, though the defendants are attempting to dispute her age. (If it can be demonstrated that Hana was sixteen at the time of her death due to poor documentation or deception on the part of the adoption agency and the orphanage in Ethiopia, her parents face lesser criminal charges concerning their role in her death.) I'm also struggling with my mix of thoughts and emotions concerning their adoptive parents. I find that I had far more compassion for the contrite parents of the Liberian adoptees, Lydia and Zariah Schatz. These Evangelical Christian homeschooling parents faced a similar situation, and were very guilty of horrible abuse, but I also understand the tremendous power of the thought reform used by Pearl and the tremendous pressures within the culture of homeschooling to follow Pearl's methods.

In the Schatz Family, while using the Michael Pearl recommended implement to hit seven year old Lydia after several hours for mispronouncing a spelling word, the child collapsed from the consequences of renal failure. She was found dead in the Chico, California home of Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz when emergency services arrived, the home where these evangelical Christians homeschooled their children. Lydia's surviving thirteen year old sister Zariah was also found to be in renal failure as well and was hospitalized. The parents plead guilty to the charges against them in 2011 and were incarcerated, but they also demonstrated great remorse. Testimonies from the people who knew them well found them to be kind people but were following the instructions of Michael Pearl to obtain the results that he promised them – if they followed his instructions implicitly. The children's bodies broke before their spirits and behavior did.



I Find the Williams Family Much More Disturbing

Though I am not discounting the influence of Pearl on Carri Williams in particular, I am more deeply troubled by what seems to me to be a lack of integrity, familial love, and parental concern in the behavior and example of the Williams parents. I see little to no contrition in them, and I am also very disturbed by the lack of loving sacrifice on the part of Larry and Carri Williams for one other in this legal battle. Each Williams parent has plead “not guilty” to the charges against them, and the individual testimonies of the parents label the other for the responsibility for choosing the specific methods allegedly meant to discipline their adopted children. Each parent claims to have only been complying with the poor decisions the other in the hope of reducing their own culpability and sentence. We shall see how these arguments impressed the jury later this week.

I find their individual self-interest at the expense of their respective spouse deeply troubling, particularly because Carri claimed under oath this week that they followed a complementarian gender hierarchy in their marriage. If that were truly the case in principle, each partner would be “falling on the sword” to spare the other party a more stringent sentence, just out of principle if not also just out of mutual love. We've witnessed just the opposite this week. They attempted to blame and smear one another to spare themselves a greater punishment. In coming days, we will learn whether or not this was an effective strategy, though I believe that it speaks poorly of their character.

Emmanuel suffered from urinary incontinence, not an uncommon problem for boys that age who have been adopted from foreign orphanages. The Williams parents both testified that they felt that the child did so willfully, so he was not only forced to sleep on the floor, was locked in from the outside of the family's “shower room” and nursery closet for as long as twelve to fifteen hours (with linens and blankets for comfort), was “hosed down” in the yard outside, and siblings would also do so in the house with Emmanuel as a punishment. (I've read nothing about Hana suffering from bedwetting, but I have read references to testimony that she was also being hosed down like an animal in the yard outside of the home.) Both children spent time sleeping on the floor in these aforementioned rooms rooms that were locked from the outside, one that kept the children in complete darkness, though Hana also would be required to sleep in the barn in a sleeping bag. For Hana, to correct her thinking, the family would play audio recordings of the Bible from outside of the nursery closet while she was locked there in the dark for extended hours.

The Williams' natural children were told to stop using sign language with Emmanuel at some point, and they would only communicate with him by stomping on the floor. Both Hana and Emmanuel were eventually served frozen food or sandwiches made with bread that was soaked in liquid to make it unpleasant, and they were often forced to take meals together alone outside, away from the family. (Some of this was explained as punishment for stealing food.) Hana was found to have an H. pylori infection which contributes to some gastric ulcers, so this was certainly no help to her condition of malnourishment. These adopted children were eventually excluded from the celebration of holidays with the rest of the family. Hana's head was shaved more than once, and because of concern about a Hepatitis B infection, she was eventually restricted to use of an outdoor chemical toilet and was denied use of the facilities inside the home. And, of course, there were the beatings with switches, plumbing line, and glue sticks. The children were beaten on the bottoms of their feet per Emmanuel's testimony, a time honored practice of child abusers because resulting injuries are harder to notice. It is legal in the State of Washington to spank a child, so long as the action leaves no signs of a mark on the skin or tissue.

The Williams' natural children were spared the extensive abuse that was inflicted upon adopted, foreign born Hana and Immanuel. This was also true of the Schatz family, but to my knowledge, their siblings were not also instructed to participate in the Pearl-recommended abuse practices. The Williams parents not only enlisted their other natural children to punish their adopted siblings, they also instructed their children to conceal information and lie to authorities about the measures used against Hana and Emmanuel. Though Bill Gothard and Jonathan Lindvall have also either recommended or practiced restriction of food and confinement in locked closets and rooms, and though Pearl has recommended the hosing of incontinent children out of doors to shame them into compliance, the Williams Family seem to me to have grossly extended these already abusive methods. Experts witnesses defined these practices and treatment as torture. The food issues also seem more significant when considering Hana's substantial weight loss and the fact that both adopted children had no access to medical care since 2009. (Recall that Hana died in May of 2011).

I understand well that defense attorneys are hired to defend their clients, and part of their job involves exhausting every loophole available to either vindicate their clients or at least mitigate charges so that their clients face the least imposing sentence as is possible. In addition to all of the deeply disturbing aspects of this process, I've found the grilling of Emmanuel, Hana's brother, to be especially difficult. This young, deaf boy spent several days on the stand, for two and a half hours each day only, using deaf interpreters. This boy was questioned and negated, and it was even suggested that he'd altered his testimony because he received lunches and was allowed to play video games while waiting to give testimony because of this special treatment. (Though many therapists testified that the boy suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, this was also aggressively challenged, but these witnesses adamantly maintained that the trauma occurred in the Williams' home after the adoption.) The child was miserably treated while in the Williams' home, but he was questioned in an adversarial way before the court as though he was the source of this own problems, soliciting his own abuse due to poor behavior. He witnessed the starving of his sister and shared in a good deal of the treatment that Hana received, but he was treated as the culprit by those advocating for his parents.

I am also disgusted by Carri Williams similar testimony about Hana. Carri stated in court that she believes that Hana had, in fact, “killed herself,” consistent with what she reported to the 911 Emergency Operator. She also claimed under oath that Hana did not look emaciated (my wording) until she saw the child dead on the floor of her home. My interpretation of her statements suggest that she believed that if Hana was found to be under weight upon autopsy, then she (Carrie, the mother) felt that it was a condition that had something to do with the dying process and was not due to starvation prior to death.

On social media and in comments in some media reports of the trial, people who knew Carri claim that she was not only a long-time and zealous evangelist for Pearl's methods, she also allegedly made statements to people that she could not wait for Hana to come of age so that she no longer had to be responsible for her. This was likely another motivation to make the claim that Hana was actually older than the stated age noted on her adoption and homeschooling enrollment documentation. If Hana were just a year or two older than they were lead to believe, the Williams Family could disown her sooner rather than later. Some have also stated that Carri had a fantasy about adopting a younger, doll-like girl that she could mold and model, but instead, found a budding teen in her care, complete with what Carri called “oppositional” behavior. This brings to mind other things I have written about parental convenience as opposed to a duty to care appropriately for a child.

For the past few weeks, we have not only read reports of testimony wherein the parents of these children have blamed one another for the conditions that Hana lived under, we've heard Carrie claim that she was not ignorant of both Hana's declining health and of other approaches or resources that could have helped them overcome the challenges they faced with both of these adopted children. They've sought to have Hana's documented age changed, allegedly, to reduce their own culpability and the magnitude of their sentencing. And, most notably, Carri Williams claims in many ways that the children were responsible for their own suffering and demise. As she states on the call to 911, Hana killed herself. When the emergency operator asked her to explain why Carri thought Hana had “killed herself” (wondering what symptoms made her believe that the girl was indeed dead), Carri's immediate response was, “Um, she's really rebellious.”



To find summaries of each day of court testimony and news reports, please visit the website, Why Not Train A Child? You will find daily summaries there, links to media reports, in addition to a catalogue of information about all of these deaths. I am also beyond impressed with writer Maureen McCauley Evans' reporting on the events and testimony in the courtroom, so much as she's been able. She's chronicled events on her blog, Light of Day Stories. Both of these sources will direct you to media reports from which my here summary was drawn.


The Pearl Method

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Pearl, though you may read more HERE, let me offer this summary. Michael Pearl is an evangelical minister with a Baptist flavor who follows a system of strict, adversarial hierarchy in the home. As you will have noted in the embedded videos, he devised an authoritarian system of corporal punishment for children. In terms of gender, his wife lays out her family's beliefs in the very shame-based book called Created to be His Helpmeet which became staggeringly popular among Evangelical Christian homeschoolers. He calls his system of punishment “Child Training” which quotes the language of the King James Translation of the Bible directly. He propagates his methods through his parachurch organization and magazine, both named No Greater Joy (coining another phrase written by the Apostle Paul), and through his book called To Train Up A Child. Considering that most of the people who subscribe to his teachings ascribe to a special creation theory of the origins of life and a special status for mankind as created in God's image, Pearl ironically leans towards what I would define as an evolutionary or Darwinian model of how to approach behavioral training and management in children. He derives his behavior modification system for children from the same approach used by the Amish to train horses.

I will state that the book does a very good job of stressing the consistency that a young child needs, I find little else about the book that is positive. It shames parents into accepting a system that requires parents to hit their children with a whip-like piece of pluming supply line because it does not leave lasting marks on the skin. (This technique has resulted in rhabdomyolosis, a potentially lethal condition that causes kidney failure resulting from substantial muscle damage, fragments from which lodge within and block the filtering structures within the kidney.) According to Pearl, punishment must continue until a child's behavior (or comfortable breathing) has been completely “broken,” as demonstrated by the child's passive posture and behavior. Failure to follow through into this broken state is tantamount to sending the child to hell, as resisting the parent is directly analogous to rebellion against God Himself that will surely persist into that child's adulthood.

The media continues to report that the book advocates the striking of children with an implement as early as six months of age, but the book and isolated quotes on the website also state that if a two month old can “fuss,” they can be punished. (Read pertinent quotes from the book HERE, and do not buy the book but read the text HERE.) Pearl also teaches the binding and squeezing of infants to cease their crying (the cause of Sean Paddock's death), not as a method of making that child feel secure but as a form of punishment to arrest behavior. As wives are thought of to be the natural enemy of the husband due to an inherent gender-based adversarial relationship, infants are also defined as diabolical tyrants who willfully seek to dominate their parents. This type of attitude towards other human beings for a greater cause has been demonstrated in Albert Bandura's research to cause moral disengagement.

For more comprehensive information documenting and critiquing Michael Pearl's approach, please visit the website, Why Not Train a Child? The host there, Hermana Linda, has tirelessly catalogued and noted all of the documentation related to these cases, criticisms of Pearl, commentaries about him, and some of Pearl's own responses to criticism against him. She also tracks good information about other practices of abuse within the Fundamentalist Evangelical Christian community. Tulip Girl also hosts a blog with moving perspectives, documentation and histories concerning Pearl, the fallen victims and the survivors, other “Christian” restrictive/abusive child-raising systems, as well as inspiring posts about moving on from such systems to embrace far better alternatives.


Sigh....

In summary, it is quite obvious that I am grieved for the children who suffer (and have died) under this kind of abuse, and I grieve for the parents who were emotionally and spiritually blackmailed into employing such aggressive and harmful practices of abuse because they believed these techniques would be the best thing for their children. Many did so because they believed that it was possible to remove the motivation for bad behavior if not sin itself from the hearts of their children. Many did so, believing that they were actually saving their children's souls from eternal hell and torture. And then, there are other parents who I believe follow these practices because they promise them that they will achieve their implausible fantasies. I think that some also wish for their lives to be easier, so they follow these practices for their own convenience.

As a Christian, I am grieved that such extreme cases have come to represent what Christianity produces, and they use it as a straw man to discount Christians, God, if not all religious pursuits. I find that Pearl's book weaves some Christian ideas into his traditions, but they are not Christian traditions that are found clearly and plainly in the Bible. Some people look at the extreme example of Pearl and believe that he represents all of us. Those who have issues with faith and with Christianity, or even those who have had bad experiences with or in homeschooling where these techniques gained great popularity can use them as a straw man to discount all Christians. In private, I often say that the cruelty of the fringe give the good and earnest Christians and homeschoolers a terrible name, when we do not even follow or believe these types of principles and do not live these lifestyles. Christianity purposes to show forth God's love and boasts that it is the source of health, life, and eternal life. These examples resulted in sad abuse and death. All of this leaves me broken in so many ways, I cannot count them.



Hopefully, there will be more to come
(I am planning two additional posts)
concerning nouthetic and Biblical counseling
after the Williams Trial has concluded.

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

July 2013 Trial Update: Michael Pearl Related Death of Hanna Williams

The Williams Trial in Washington State began this week, nearly two years after the death of Hana Alemu (Williams).  There were issues concerning her age, her body was exhumed, and other problems delayed a more timely trial for the parents who adopted the child from Ethiopia and allegedly neglected her and abused her to the point of death.

For updates on the trial as it unfolds, I think that the best info can be found at the Why Not Train a Child website?  I am so grateful for the resources there.

Most recently, Hermana Linda who hosts the site has linked to a blog that is new to me, and it offers firsthand insights from the courtroom.  Maureen McCauley Evans is a Seattle writer, editor, and artist who has taken it upon herself to attend the as much of the trial as possible and encourages as many people who can to so to do likewise.  Find her writing at Light of Day Stories:  Lessons Learned from Adoption.

~~~~~

(Original post from 2Dec11.)
Hanna Willams


Another Pearl-related death, another adoptee from Africa. 

I'm upset that the show mentioned the Pearl's tender comments about Hanna Williams' death but that they neglected to mention the post that the Pearls put up in reference to Lydia Schatz' death wherein Pearl “laughs at critics.” He didn't seem to be doing any laughing on CNN when being grilled by Anderson Cooper. 



Friday, March 1, 2013

More on Baucham's Sin of Shyness: Decide for Yourself



Having so recently made mention of Voddie Baucham's sermon and one of his books, while revisiting his teachings, I wanted to revisit another matter. Some time ago, a reader sent me information about Baucham's online claim that “anti-Baucham websites” have completely distorted a 2007 sermon he delivered on child discipline and corporal punishment.

Someone online summarized one of Baucham's teachings in this way in an online discussion where the charge of misrepresentation was made: “I meant to unsubscribe after your ridiculous argument that 'a parent who doesn't make their kid say hello to me is sinning, and if I allow the parent to let their child disobey I am sinning.'”

Since the topic at hand was a matter that I've addressed here specifically in the past, I thought that I would make Baucham's own words more easily accessible to arrest any confusion about his claims that the way that he was quoted here was “inaccurate.” I don't believe that I misrepresented him in any way. This person's assessment of the matter sounds fairly direct, concise, and accurate to me.


First Time Obedience

I've written in more detail about Baucham's preaching concerning what others have named “First Time Obedience” (FTO), a principle that he later adopted as his own position. Because this is a lengthy subject about which writings are plenteous and the discussion long, this element is not my primary focus in this post. However, while mentioning it in the context of the sermon in question, I would like to reiterate that I find the concept quite cruel, as Baucham seems to demand of young children what most adult Christians fail repeatedly to yield to God themselves. Even God allows men to stumble and repent, and Jesus spoke of “seventy times seven” forgiveness. God not only allows us to make sinful mistakes while He beckons us to choose righteousness, but He also readily forgives us when we turn from them.

I find it ironic that I'm accused of forsaking Biblical principle in favor of professional knowledge and secular or societal influences, all while Baucham explains that tolerance and forbearance actually train a child to accept sin as permissible. The Apostle Peter was instructed by Jesus Himself to forgive others, but Baucham claims that immature children can only make a single sinful error. He also teaches that parents sin when they tolerate more than a single error, sending the message to the child that sin is not a serious matter. The consequences of the child's error must be severe enough that they understand that they cannot repeat it.

In short, I would first say that Baucham's thesis sounds a bit to me like a practical psychology of parental convenience. He also fails to support his ideas with specific Scripture, other than general ones about correcting children and encouraging good behavior. It sounds to me like a works-based salvation of general intolerance that spiritualizes personal preference. Second, I believe that those who embrace the concept of FTO put their children at great risk. Though I do not share all of the opinions of Alice Miller, I believe that her works including For Your Own Good point out several flaws in this approach as well. When we train children to become profoundly obedient adults who respond to forceful authorities, as Christians, we destroy Bereans. We create people who fail to think for themselves. In society, we create citizens ripe for totalitarianism because “might makes right.” They will follow authority for authority's sake, primarily because they sign over their decision making to an intermediary who speaks for either Caesar or for God.


Has Voddie been misrepresented?  Listen for yourself.

Voddie Baucham on Corporal Punishment and Shyness in a Young Child from Under Much Grace on Vimeo.

In previous posts on this subject, I linked to a few audio downloads of Voddie Baucham. I appreciate that, for the most part, his tone sounds kind and reasonable. Perhaps this is why so many people like him as a speaker. He sounds nice and is engaging, so perhaps people assume that what he's saying can't be that bad. Amazingly, I don't have that problem. I find those things which he proposes to be quite troubling. But I also suppose that most people don't have time to listen to an entire sermon when trying to understand this topic. In the interests of clarity, I've pulled out just a few limited clips related to some of the more problematic statements in just one of Baucham's presentations.


From Voddie Baucham's Child Training Sermon at Hardin Baptist Church (2007.11.04 AM-020):

(I didn't transcribe the first section. I included it in the audio (via video) as an afterthought at the request of my husband because he felt that it elucidated a great deal about homeschooling's “Biblical” patriarchy movement.)
20:50 – 22:10 “'Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, and the rod of correction will drive it far from them.' The Word of God says that your children desperately, desperately need to be spanked. Amen, hallelujah, praise the Lord and spank your kids, okay? They desperately need to be spanked. And they need to be spanked often. They do. I meet people all the time, you know, and their like, 'Yeah, you know, I can think of maybe four or five times that I had to spank Junior.' Really? That's unfortunate. Because unless you raised Jesus the Second, there were days that Junior needed to be spanked five times before breakfast. If you only spanked your child five times, that means that almost every time they disobeyed you, you let it go. And almost every time they dishonored you, you let it go. When they were two and you said, 'Come 'ere,' and they said, 'No!' You should have “worn them out,” but you didn't. And so you think because it didn't escalate to a certain point that that means that you didn't need to spank 'em. No. They disobeyed. We can't tolerate disobedience...
25:20 -25:38 A lot of your toddlers throw fits because you've taught them that that's the way they can control you. When instead, you just need to have an all day session where you just “wear them out”... 
27:25 – 28:20 “Let me give you an example. A prime example. The so-called 'shy kid,' who doesn't shake hands at church, okay? Usually what happens is you come up, you know, and well, here I am. I'm a guest, and I walk up, and I'm saying 'Hi' to somebody, and they say to their kid, 'Hey, you know, say – say good morning to Dr. Baucham.' And the kid hides, and runs behind the leg. And here's what's supposed to happen. This is what we've agreed on silently in our culture. What's supposed to happen is, I'm supposed to look at their child and say, 'Hey, that's okay.'” 
“But I can't do that. If I do that, then what has happened is, number one, the child has just sinned by not doing what they were told to do. It was direct disobedience. Secondly, the parent is in sin for not correcting it. And thirdly, I'm in sin because I just told a child that it was okay for them to disobey and dishonor their parent in direct violation of Scripture. I can't do that. I won't do that. I'm going to stand there until you make them do what you said.”

Voddie Baucham has inserted himself into the process of how a parent deals with their child? If the parent choses to handle the situation differently than he would, how long will he “stand there?” How would he go about ensuring against the “sin” of the parent? Will he publicly take that parent to task, regardless of circumstances or issues with the child about which he may be unaware? Will he go to the pastor and demand that some formal disciplinary action be taken to ensure that the parent in question does not sin?

Take note of this similar theme in one of Baucham's books.


From Family Driven Faith, pp 109 - 110: 
What this means is the degree to which children properly respond to the authority of their parents is indicative of the degree to which they are filled with the Spirit. In other words, obedience is a spiritual issue... 
You tell your two-year-old to do something in front of the pastor’s wife and she sticks out her tongue yells “no,” and takes off running in the other direction... Eventually you learn that everyone is willing to accept this behavior, or at least to make comments that suggest their acceptance.

I am in no way suggesting that parents should not train or discipline their children, nor that inappropriate behavior should be tolerated, though I'm sure that my own critics will try to paint me this way. (I'm also criticized by many anti-spanking activists because I do believe that limited corporal punishment can be appropriate when a child is at risk of a greater and immediate physical danger.) My concern regards healthy and realistic expectations of a young child and their ability to master behavior and emotion, especially when those standards have been set by someone other than parents, family, and those who are familiar with a child. Please take note again, I in no way condone rudeness such as sticking out one's tongue or running anywhere inside a church building under any circumstances which Baucham offers in his book as exemplars of inappropriate behavior.

Nurses are required to train in basic child growth and development to be able to not only identify developmental delays but also to assess how children respond to illness and treatment. Included in that developmental theory is an understanding of age appropriate emotional development and self-mastery. Young children often manifest fear as shyness or as anger, especially when they are pre-verbal, because their ability to communicate and modulate their own emotions is limited. Physical illness or unidentified learning disabilities can also interfere with communication.

Though I am painfully well aware that many parents do not discipline their children appropriately, I also do not believe that it is Voddie Baucham's place to determine the appropriate standard for children, nor is it appropriate for him to determine how all parents should best discipline their own children. Not all parents believe that it is the best choice to spank their children, and for those who do employ corporal punishment, I know many that would not agree that God requires that children be spanked “often.” I also believe that it is quite inappropriate for Baucham to suggest that he has the ability to discern whether parents are, in fact, “filled with the Spirit,” particularly by his standard of personal preference concerning the behavior of their children. Christians within the pale of traditional, conservative orthodoxy also disagree on the matter of “responding to authority.” (Many reject Baucham's high demand, ecclesiocentric system of patriarchy and family integration as aberrant.)

In the audio sermon at Hardin Baptist Church, immediately before the statement about the “so-called shy kid,” Baucham speaks of a three year old. Because he expresses a similar concern in his book about how a two year old should behave in a church setting, I'm inclined to think that children who are three and four years of age should be skilled at greeting him in this way. Though I agree with him on nature of the desirable and undesirable behavior he cites, and I also agree that both negative behavior in small children and issues of sin are sober matters, I find his authoritarian approach to this topic to be quite flawed. They are matters to which a parent must attend. If a child manifests fear as shyness, or if an overwhelmed, young child manifests fear by sticking out their tongue, I don't necessarily find this to be a sin, particularly considering the age of the child. But I also find Baucham's concept of single trial learning or “First Time Obedience” to be highly abusive.


? ? ?

So after listening to the clips themselves, what do you think? Did the woman's comment noted above sound like a distortion based on misrepresentations of things that Baucham has said himself? Does he expect that his pleasant tone and style should somehow mitigate the offensive, inaccurate, and intolerant things he's said?

Decide for yourself.




Baucham on FIRST TIME OBEDIENCE

First Time Obedience and Unquestioned Submission (Pearl-style, authoritarian discipline)
      • A review of the principle of sacerdotalism and parental convenience (as a control issue in dysfunctional families) as rationales for requiring FTO and “leaps of faith” required under multigenerational faithfulness.
        • Review of the tendency to make every banal daily activity one of great eternal spiritual significance as a consequence of works-based salvation. Includes a discussion of viewing personality traits that do not fit the belief system’s paradigm as sinful as well as the building up of all gender related activities as sacramental for the impartation of inward sanctification.
        • Blog host’s personal experience with inherent personality traits treated by parents as sin, the idolatry of seeking parental approval, and the consequences of requiring unquestioned submission with the use of guilt and shame that predisposes one to easy brainwashing and compliance with thought reform. Includes a section from Biderman’s Chart of Coercion addressing the powerful effects of devaluing individuals in religious settings.
      • Discussion of the development of how perfectionism, works-based salvation and First Time Obedience squelch problem-solving skill and prevent the development of critical thinking under the guise of multigenerational faithfulness.
    • Discussion of the development of how perfectionism, works-based salvation and First Time Obedience squelch problem-solving skill and prevent the development of critical thinking under the guise of multigenerational faithfulness.

Monday, July 30, 2012

Another Case of Abuse of a Homeschooled, Adopted Child

A fifteen year old girl was removed from the Georgia home of a family who are accused of confining the adopted and homeschooled child in an outhouse that was not tall enough to sit in and within an in-use chicken coop.  They are also alleged to have kept a dog "shock collar" on the child.

Monday, April 2, 2012

Practical Considerations for Confrontation of a Pastor with Spiritually Abusive Tendencies: When You Decide that You Must Go to the Star Chamber

A few years ago, right after several parishioners at Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM) in the Northern Virginia Area came forward publicly about the lack of proper care and the outright abuse they the victims were met with concerning child molesters in their midst, some of those involved were determined to go to CJ Mahaney in order to seek justice. Mahaney was the highest authority within the church system, and it was felt by some that if they could approach Mahaney directly with their concerns, that they would be heard and he would personally make amends needful for healing. After all, he was such a good and earnest man, wasn't he? He cries all the time, so it proves that he's compassionate, right? Knowing his history with People of Destiny as a cultic group through my own former church, and according to the “old” Cult Awareness Network, I offered some advice.

Sunday, April 1, 2012

If You Choose to Go to Star Chamber Confrontations with Ministers, At Least Be Knowledgable About Abuse

Consider how to best prepare yourself!

 Recent posts here discussed the risks that a person faces, but there are also smart ways to prepare for meetings of confrontations with spiritually abusive leadership. In addition to knowledge about spiritual abuse as discussed in this post, there are pragmatic and physical measures that one can take in addition to exploring what the Bible has to say about such meetings, if it mentions them at all.

Saturday, March 31, 2012

CNN AC360's Investigation into Pinehaven Part I of III: Yet Another Child Abuse and Trafficking Ring

AC360 again focuses on one of the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) affiliated homes for troubled teens as part of its ongoing series concerning child abuse by Evangelical Christians called Ungodly Discipline.  (See addendum note.)  Like Hephzibah House, Pinehaven in Montana is just one of many of these types of residential facilities where drastic discipline techniques, beating, shaming, and heavy labor are used to allegedly help purify the souls of these throw-away children. As Kathryn Joyce points out in her 2011 article, it seems that the laws in Montana where many homes facilitate their ability to operate, despite many reports of injustice and abuse. In many cases, these children who are seen as hopelessly tainted by sin or are rendered worthless because they've been sexually violated are told that they can only live a marginally meaningful life. The harsh conditions and complete isolation from family that they're forced to endure at the IFB homes supposedly will purify them so that this marginal life will be possible for them.

CNN AC360's Investigation into Pinehaven Part II of III: The IFB Ignores More Sexual Abuse while “Pinehaven Oversees Pinehaven”

Continuing with Part II of the CNN Anderson Cooper 360 investigation into Pinehaven of St. Ignatius, Montana, one of the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) affiliated homes for troubled children that employ extreme abuse and forced heavy labor to purify their souls. Note that Kathryn Joyce titled her article about these IFB homes as “Escape from Montana” when it first appeared in Mother Jones in August, 2011 because the Montana state laws apparently facilitate the free operation of the abuse that takes place within them.

CNN AC360's Investigation into Pinehaven Part III of III: Escape from the Illinois Child Trafficking Pipeline of Children to Montana

HT to Chuckles Travels:  "Your Kids" or your prey, Mr. Duke?
Continuing with Part III of the CNN Anderson Cooper 360 investigation into Pinehaven of St. Ignatius, Montana, one of the Independent Fundamental Baptist affiliated homes for troubled children that employ extreme abuse and forced heavy labor to purify their souls. Note that Kathryn Joyce titled her article about these IFB homes as “Escape from Montana” when it first appeared in Mother Jones in August, 2011 because the Montana state laws apparently facilitate the free operation of the abuse that takes place within them.

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

What Did Jesus Say About the "Blueness of the Wound"?


This month marked the second anniversary of the death of Lydia Schatz, and the sixth anniversary date of the death of Sean Paddock quickly approaches at the end of the month. Then, before we know it, May will be here, marking the first anniversary of the death of Hana-Grace Williams.

While pondering the Independent Fundamental Baptists' (IFB) admiration for Proverbs 20:30 in support of beating children until they are bruised to purge ad drive away evil from them, a different Scripture popped into my mind. It happened on the anniversary date of Lydia's death as I prayed for all those who have been so deeply affected by the events. This thought hasn't occurred to me before when considering these matters so intently over the past year, but I thought of one distinct and very different Scripture from both the New and the Old Testaments. I recalled how Jesus stepped into the synagogue and declared the fulfillment of words of Isaiah:

Sunday, February 5, 2012

What It's Like to Experience Only the Right Side of the Brain in the Way that Children Do (A Neuroscientist Experiences a Stroke on the Left, Analytical Side of the Brain)


Michael and Debi Pearl claim that very young children exercise their diabolical wills to dominate their parents, one of the justifications that they use to prop up their aggressive practices of corporal punishment. In a previous post describing the development of the minds of young children, I pointed out that the brainwaves of a child under the age of two are reflective of a level of consciousness much like what the adult experiences while they are sleeping. From ages two to six, the child's level of consciousness is much like dreaming or falling asleep for the adult.

Saturday, February 4, 2012

More from Janet Heimlich on Problematic and Abusive Corporal Punishment within Evangelical Christianity

 

A previous post referenced Janet Heimlich's book, Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Malicious Child Maltreatment, noting that Christians have other “compassionate, healthy” alternatives that are available to them to help them in their duty to raise “happy, strong grown-ups” (pg 120). They do not need to resort to corporal punishment, certainly not some of the methods of aggressive discipline that many Evangelicals tend to promote.

The author goes on to point out several other trenchant points in the Conclusion section of the chapter entitled The Perils of Mixing Faith and Corporal Punishment which I believe are worthy of mention and discussion from a Christian view. The conclusion section appears on pages 119 and 120 of the book.


Thursday, February 2, 2012

Remnant Fellowship and Their History of Advocating Abusive Child Discipline Practices: In Loving Memory of Young Josef (yet another casualty)

Gwen Shamblin and Remnant Fellowship

Many may be familiar with the WeighDown Workshop books and seminars by dietician Gwen Shamblin, but some may be unfamiliar with the cultic church system she founded in Tennessee in 1999 called Remnant Fellowship. 

The primary focus of her weight loss message involved praying and seeking consolation from God rather than turning to food for comfort and physical satisfaction. For the Christian, this basic principle seems quite reasonable on the surface, but Gwen eventually took things much further. Within Shamblin's developing system and philosophy, she subtly establishes her principles of weight management as perfectly synonymous with following God in the same way that Bill Gothard insists that his extrabiblical teachings are also non-optional mandates which the faithful Christian must follow in order to be acceptable to God. She also developed an excessive focus on her preferred version of an authority structure with harsh consequences for those who fail to comply, also in the same ways that Gothard focuses on authority and consequences.