to want Amazon to withdraw a book endosing beating children from sale?

[missfliss]

Dear Mumsnetters,

This is my first post here, so please be kind. And yes, I have joined specifically because of this issue ? but I?m sure I?ll stick around too and have signed up to be a product tester etc.

A friends Facebook post today made me aware of the following title for sale on Amazon UK which advocates and endorses the beating of children ? from as young as 4 months old ? as a ?discipline tool?.

The book is called ?How to train Up a Child? and I have quoted some bits from it below.

I realise amazon aren?t breaking the law by selling it, but cannot believe they have chosen to list it for sale ? and so I have started a petition to get it withdrawn.

Thanks for reading,

Missfliss

Here?s the book:
www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1892112000/ref=s9_simh_gw_p14_d0_i1?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-3&pf_rd_r=1BEG0RMJC314P2KS4VYD&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=358549207&pf_rd_i=468294&tag=mumsnet&ascsubtag=mnforum-21

here?s my petition
www.change.org/petitions/amazon-uk-withdraw-a-title-which-endorses-beating-children-from-4-months-of-age


here?s the quotes:
Quotes from the book:

"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"

So hitting a 4 month old with a willow sprig is an acceptable form of punishment?

"After about ten acts of stubborn defiance, followed by ten switchings, he surrendered his will to one higher than himself. In rolling the wheel, he did what every accountable human being must do-he humbled himself before the "highest" and admitted that his interests are not paramount. After one begrudged roll, my wife turned to other chores"

She is talking about a 15 month old baby who would not play with what SHE wanted him to play with!

"On the bare legs or bottom, switch him eight or ten licks; then, while waiting for the pain to subside, speak calm words of rebuke. If the crying turns to a true, wounded, submissive whimper, you have conquered; he has submitted his will. If the crying is still defiant, protesting and other than a response to pain, spank him again"

Let's beat that child in to submission! That's exactly why we have children isn't it? Pah!

"One particularly painful experience of nursing mothers is the biting baby. My wife did not waste time finding a cure. When the baby bit, she pulled hair (an alternative has to be sought for baldheaded babies)"

Yes, pull a newborn's hair! That'll teach him!

[cafecito]

it's just disgusting that this is stocked on amazon. thanks for your post OP.

[bemybebe]

the authors are just sociopaths imho... off to sign the petition

[Redbindy]

This has been about for a while and just shows how sick some people are. On a similar topic www.christiandomesticdiscipline.com/ warrants a bit of investigation as well.

[Sheshelob]

It is obviously written for people who get some kind of sadistic thrill from hurting babies. It does not belong on Amazon.

To those of you who are arguing freedom of speech, you do realise that you are firmly standing up for something that is advocating hurting children in gratuitous detail, right?

Are you comfortable with that, because from where I'm standing, you look like libertarian idiots?

[Weegiemum]

Oh my goodness!

I know a family who use this book - I'd never checked it out though I've always thought them a bit weird. For sake of complete disclosure, I'm a practicing (like church every Sunday) Christian.

They HE (really I'm not objecting to this, and with my dd2 it's a real option!) because they don't want their children to be exposed to "lies" - like evolution, or the fact that the earth is more than 6,000 years old, or that Adam and Eve and Noah's Ark might be allegory.

They use an American HE curriculum and everything starts with a bible verse. Last time they visited I was taken aside at the door and asked that our dc didn't talk about school, or evolution, or treats, or sweets, or anything else that might "upset" her boys. By the time I got to the family room, my dd2 was teaching them the names of dinosaurs (plastic ones in her bag) and getting deep into Jurassic and Cretaceous periods and millions of years :D .

I'd heard from them, and felt a bit :( !! that they used corporal punishment on their sons. Due to other things we've not seen them for over a year (they live about 4 hours away) but I remember dh pointing out a weird bruise on the eldest boy - who was 5 at the time. All the boys are very, very 'biddable' in that they do what they're asked without question. My dc are a bit more "spirited", but I'm happy with that.

I've signed the petition, but really I'd not looked at this book before (the mum recommended CLBB to me even before her dc were born) but this thread has thrown up some really difficult issues. If they are beating their lovely boys, it really needs to stop.

Horrible book. I don't agree with censorship, but this is advocating not just a wee slap on the hand (which I'm also not happy with) but beating with a switch or a cable? Abuse. Plain and simple.

[SconeRhymesWithGone]

There are religious bookstores run by conservative Christian denominations in the US that do not stock this book. It really is extreme and completely indefensible. It is entirely appropriate to ask Amazon not to stock it; censorship by the market is very different from government censorship.

Also, evangelical does not necessarily mean the same thing as fundamentalist.

Criticism of this book and others from a largely evangelical perspective can be found here.

www.gentlechristianmothers.com/topics/unprepared.php

[LilacPeony]

Sounds like that family need to be checked out by social services Weegie.

[Buzzardbird]

Have signed.

[FoxyRoxy]

Some of the replies on this thread are baffling. Freedom of speech only goes so far! This is not a new book, it was first published in 1994, it is not going to go away quietly if it's ignored.

Advocating child abuse by making profit from books about it is wrong.

[itsonlysubterfuge]

Has anyone actually read the book?

[FoxyRoxy]

I have read part of it, I can't force myself to read such drivel cover to cover and as that would also include purchasing it I'm happy to not read it.

[Gruffalump]

Mc balls, are you mc drunk?

[itsonlysubterfuge]

It's available to read for free www.quicksilverqueen.com/ttuacbook.html to anyone who is curious as I was. I definately dont agree with the message they are putting across, but I certainly don't think they are advocating beating your children.

[bemybebe]

what are you talking about? there are paragraphs on how to do precisely that

[Madmum24]

They also have authored the book "Holy Sex; the way God wants it". I wonder does that involve switching with willow sticks too?

Horrendous.

[Flobbadobs]

Signed both petitions and shared, thanks OP.
The books that are on sale as part of the bundle look rather terrifying in a different way. We have a fundamentalist Christian bookshop very close by, I know they do sell the helpmeet books, I may have to have an investigate into whether this one is being sold too (assuming I don't get struck by lightening when I walk through the door...) It really is that type of place and is connected to an American church.

[Trigglesx]

I personally think the book is awful, but I'm trying to keep an open thought process here. Because if it was strictly a "this is illegal, it should not be sold in the UK" issue, I suspect Amazon would have pulled it ages ago. As another poster pointed out, it was published in 1994, so it's been available for 19 years now. This is hardly a new book.

I also think that any challenges towards the book will bring up a freedom of religion issue. Again, while I don't agree with their viewpoints, I wonder if perhaps because this book is published through their religious house and couched in religious tones throughout (and bolstered by their religious beliefs), that it will be protected in that respect. I'm not sure - perhaps someone can ask any current MN peoples that work for the police (perhaps Vicar IIRC?) is the methods they are recommending are technically illegal. (reprehensible, yes, but illegal and reprehensible are two different things, unfortunately) I think that if they do not leave any visible mark that this may actually be legal, only just. But maybe it might be helpful to check so we know where it stands.

Again, I want to point out that I do not agree with their teachings at all, however, I unfortunately also recognise the importance of freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

[Sheshelob]

You've raised a good point, Trigglesx. By dressing up an abuse manual as religious, they are hiding behind the principle of freedom of religion, which in itself should be benign. But the problem is religion is too often used as a smokescreen for abuse and a justification for abusers. So where do we draw the line? I think the rights of the child should trump any religious justification for violence.

I can see this turning into a cultural relativism vs universalism argument, but with our increasingly global culture, surely there need to be human rights that trump more extreme expressions of speech and religion? Religiously normalising the beating and humiliation of children should not be tolerated, irrespective of how intertwined it is with faith.

[bemybebe]

"I unfortunately also recognise the importance of freedom of religion and freedom of speech."

Good grief, I do wish people stop bringing freedom of speech and religion where there is abuse. This is totally twisted argument, unacceptable in a civilised society.

How much abuse is acceptable to you Trigg to balance off against the freedom of speech and religion.

[Empress77]

Ive signed both petitions and glad you have raised awareness OP. As a customer of amazon I certainly dont want them to sell it. Is not censorship its common sense, you wouldnt train a dog like that how can anyone justify treating a child like that is beyond me - to have an authoritive book saying this kind of thing just normalises such behaviour and makes people who honestly buy it in the hope of teaching their child think it may be ok "as they experts say so". Child protection overrules freedom of speech, I definitely think it should be removed from sale.

[bemybebe]

I would just like to remind there is no absolute freedom of speech and religion. Child sacrifices are not allowed afaik. Incitement to violence is not ok. The list goes on... I cannot believe this needs spelling out.

[GrimmaTheNome]

We don't allow 'freedom of religion' as an excuse for FGM or 'honour killings' or polygamy ... there's probably more examples of behaviours inspired by religion (or perversions thereof) which aren't allowed.

[missfliss]

i'll ask again - if this was a religious book advocating beating women or people of different ethnicities would we bleat on about ?freedom of speech?. No. we?d just be saying those actions are indefensible even behind any banner of religion because they breach basic universal human rights

I?m quite disturbed at the inability to distinguish between censorship / consumer action and even more so the normalisation of child abuse in an instructive manual widely available/ versus ?freedom of speech?


C?mon?

[Trigglesx]

Ok, let's read my post clearly. I said THREE TIMES that I don't think it's acceptable - I don't like their teachings. So bemybebe you can not accusing me of saying that abuse is acceptable.

Regardless of whether or not I think it's acceptable, the question is whether or not what they are "preaching" is illegal. Unfortunately, I suspect it isn't, which means they can use freedom of religion and freedom of speech as protection.

Look at all the recent stuff in the news about that terrorist that we couldn't eject from the country - he and others were allowed to preach all sorts of stuff that most British people were horrified at, but freedom of religion and freedom of speech protected his rights to say those things. Unfortunately, sometimes that can be the price to having these freedoms.

Look, if this was a small bookstore you were petitioning, that was possibly more reliant on public opinion, you'd make more headway as this would affect them more. Amazon is huge and has the financial freedom to some extent to stick to the letter of the law on this one.

missfliss you are confusing the issue. "Beating" someone is illegal. They, however, are careful in their language in the book to always say "gently tap" or "lightly switch." They are not saying "beat the child into submission."

Again, I'm trying to be very clear - I don't like their teachings and don't agree with them at all. Would I like them off the shelves? Sure. But I don't think legally Amazon will have to do so. If they were literally breaching a law, don't you think the organisers of the campaign would have gone at it from that angle and contacted the appropriate authorities? If you feel that strongly that they are advocating something illegal, contact the appropriate authorities and see what they say about it. That's a much more specific way of handling it that doesn't require petitions and whatnot. If they were peddling books breaching a law, then they would likely take it off their lists to avoid prosecution. I find it hard to believe their legal team hasn't already looked at this tbh.

[Empress77]

Amazon may not have a legal obligation to remove the book but they have a moral obligation.