Okay.
At church Sunday, the sermon was about truth.
The elder who was standing in for the pastor (who was out of town) said during the sermon, as an aside almost, that Dr. Spock was very popular back when and his book was considered the “bible” of child rearing.
He then said it had bee proven totally wrong and non-workable.
Is this true?
I don’t recall reading it; what was so wrong that it espoused?
Your church elder may have been interjecting his own bias into his claim. The Book of Proverbs tells parents to beat their kids in a coupld of places, after all.
good to see you tracer!
But what parts could he have been referring to?
Did the book advocate not spanking?
what places?
The bedroom?
The rear end? 
really, I tried spankig but it didn’t work so gave it up.
I don’t see anything way wacko on his website http://www.drspock.com/
What’s the big deal?
vanilla
no doubt tracer was refering to this.
Proverbs 13:24(KJV): “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.”
Proverbs 13:24(AMP): “He who spares his rod (of discipline) hates his son, but he who loves him diligently disciplines and punishes him early.”
Proverbs 22:15: “Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him.”
Proverbs 23:13-14: “Withold not discipline from the child, for if you strike and punish him with the (reed-like) rod, he will not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.”
Proverbs 29:15 &17(AMP):
15 The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left undisciplined brings his mother to shame.
17 Correct your son, and he will give you rest; yes, he will give delight to your heart.
Dr. Spock became a leading voice against the war in Vietnam during the 60’s. That pissed off a lot of people and apparently some are still miffed.
Hm, that would certainly explain some animosity… but it says nothing about child rearing.
/waiting for Wikipedia to come back up
Oh and the big deal is in fact that Dr. Spock did advocate treating children as beings capable of reason and should only be disciplined as a last resort. This for whatever reason gave rise to the dislike of many churches that view discipline as the first line of defense. They often repeat the urban legend that his son killed himself as proof that his theories didn’t work (his sons are fine but his grandson did commit suicide)
And to be fair to Proverbs there is one that says you shouldn’t beat your child too much.
Proverbs 19:18(AMP): “Discipline your son while there is hope, but do not (indulge your angry resentments by undue chastisements and) set yourself to his ruin.”
Pediatrician chiming in. Yes, Spock was, unjustly, tarred with advocating indulgent parenting. And forces reacted to that perception. Still do to this day. He was a bit dogmatic, but hell, all child rearing books are.
Moreover the popularity of his book, and the many of its ilk that have followed, is indicative of a change in our societal family dynamics: in previous times new parents had lots of invested and ever present extended family members to ask advice of, and to revieve unsolcited advice from. They usually followed it. They also trusted their guts some. The middle class generations from the 60’s on tend not to trust their gut and don’t trust their parents advice either (if their parents are even in the same city) … they want to defer to the “experts” and get “the right answer”.* They are convinced that they are providing Skinner boxes that can produce the ideal children cum adults if only they know exactly how to do it. Being comfortable with the reality that most of how our children turn out is a function of the genes we give them and that they can really relax a little and enjoy these marvalous creatures some, secure that they will likely turn out okay despite all the mistakes that we are sure to make, is just well hard for these results oriented go-gettters to accept.
*My wife is amazed that parents ask me for parenting advice and I am awfully grateful that there is no hidden camera recording some my less than stellar parenting moments. Let it suffice that my theory is that all parenting theory goes out the window in the real world. But I usually enjoy them. And they know I love em. that makes up for a fair dinkum of mistakes I think.
I would not say he was wrong, just that he couldn’t see the whole picture. Sometimes emotions are all we humans have to go on.
Live long and prosper.
Dosen’t he also advocate child vegitarianism? I’m all for Dr. Spock, but that’s not some people’s (including my) sort of thing. Of course, his big point is “trust yourself, you know more than you think you do” and he dosen’t really profess any One True Way, good on him.
I didn’t hear about vegetarianism but I know he’s anti-cow milk. No milk and cookies.
Toward the very end of his life, Spock became a vegetarian, and the last editions of “Baby and Child Care” did advocate that children should be raised as vegetarians.
Now, I think Benjamin Spock had some absolutely idiotic ideas… but for the most part, his idiotic ideas were confined to the political arena. Fact is, in my limited experience (I have a six month old baby at home), most of the things Spock wrote about were very practical and commonsensical- and THAT’S why his book has been such a huge best-seller. He covers almost EVERY medical condition a parent is likely to come across in the first few months or years, and that’s made it valuable to me and my wife.
As for his supposedly lax views on discipline… I think Spock gets a bad rap here. True enough, he was opposed to corporal punishment. But he did NOT advocate letting your kids do whatever they please! People who claim that he did probably haven’t read his books, and are merely repeating soundbites and caricatures they’ve heard elsewhere. Spock definitely believed that children need limits and restrictions. There are many things we can fault him for, but we CANNOT blame him for parents who can’t or won’t teach their kids proper behavior.
<< Raises eyebrow >>
Fascinating.
Yes, your elder was correct. In practice the book did prove itself wrong.
Children did not receive the guidance and disciplane needed for adulthood in that era.
While He may have caught flak for his political views this was a separate event.
Love
Er, cite?
I think I will ask him what exactly he meant, and refer him to this board, if I dare…
Please do. All we seem to know is a vague definition of “children are capable of making decisions on their own” and a lot of Christians hating him.
Oh, he won a Gold Medal in the 1928 Olympics as a rower, too.
<< Children did not receive the guidance and disciplane needed for adulthood in that era. >>
What a nonsensical generalization! OTOH, many children did not receive the training in spelling and proofreading needed for adulthood in this era. In one era and out the other, I guess.