Four-year-old Sean Paddock died in 2006 from being wrapped so tightly in blankets that he was suffocated. There were long bruise marks on his backside. His 9-year-old brother was beaten so badly he limped. After investigation the mother was charged with first degree murder. 
In 2010 seven-year-old Lydia Schatz died after being beaten repeatedly for hours for making a mistake during her schooling. Some reports say she mispronounced a word, others say she misspelled a spelling word. The beatings broke down muscle tissue allowing the organs to be damaged until death resulted. Her sister was left with kidney damage from beatings. There doesn't seem to be any pictures of her anywhere, but this one of her parents is all over the Internet.
And of course there's twelve-year-old Hana who died last May after being emotionally and physically tortured over a three-year time frame. The mother repeatedly said she didn't like the child. My question is, if she really didn't like the child, why not send her to public school so the girl could get her schooling and the mother could have a break from her? And the boy adopted with Hana could have really benefitted from the special needs services he would have received in a public school,
But on to the book itself.
First of all, the book is poorly written. This is the first paragraph. It doesn't grab me.
When you tell some parents they need to switch their children, they respond, "I would if I could find someone willing to trade." (I don't understand what he means by that) I have had children in my house that would be enough to give an electric wheat grinder a nervous breakdown. The parents look like escapees from a Second World War, Polish boxcar. Another hour with them, and I would have been searching the yellow-pages for discount vasectomies.(I don't find any of this amusing. And the WW2 thing is just plain disrespectful to those who went through it) While we try to sit and talk, the children are constantly running in and out of doors, complaining of ill treatment from the others, begging to go or stay or eat, or demanding a toy that the other children will not relinquish. The mother must continually jump up and rescue some breakable object. She says, "No" six-hundred and sixty-six times in the space of two hours. She spanks each child two or three times--usually with her hand on top of a diaper. Other than misaligning the child's spine, it seems to have no effect. I have no clue what he's trying to say, and he appears to think he's funny as illustrated in this next passage also:
"BEHOLD, THE SECOND WOE"! Just last night while sitting in a meeting, I looked over to see a young mother struggling with her small child. He seemed determined to make her life as miserable as possible--and destroy her reputation in the process. She had the "Why me?" look on her tired face. He kept defiantly throwing his bottle on the floor (assisted by her picking it up and handing it back to him) and making angry noises that forced the preacher to scream louder and louder. With threats of increasingly embarrassing displays, he forced her to put him down on the floor where he proceeded to audition for circus clown while insisting on procuring a neighbor's property. When she tried to prevent his thievery and rescue the stolen goods, he kicked his feet like an eggbeater and screamed his protest.
It was enough to make you believe the Devil started out as an infant. I am just thankful that one-year-olds don't weigh two-hundred pounds, or a lot more mothers would be victims of homicide. (Is that supposed to be funny?)It causes one to understand where the concept of a "sinful nature" originated.
He makes a lot comparisons that he seems to think are funny throughout the whole book but really they're just junk writing.
The author goes on to compare training children with training all kinds of things such as animals, soldiers, and mules. From the introduction:
These truths are not new, deep insights from the professional world of research, rather, the same principles the Amish use to train their stubborn mules, the same technique God uses to train his children. They are profoundly simple and extremely obvious. After examining them with us, you will say, "I knew that all along. Where have I been? It's so obvious."
Our children are not animals. We can reason with them, explain the correct action or responses to take and urge them in the right direction.
The authors are judgmental and dogmatic.
Never even consider sending your children to private Christian schools, much less the public, automaton factories. Whether a classroom is based completely on Christian education or on secular principles is not the issue…God didn't make teenage boys and girls to sit together in a classroom every day while real life outside passes them by.
If someone wants to home school, fine. But not everyone is called to that and not everyone is capable. If you don't have a gift for teaching, let someone else teach your child. Just because you send them to a school, doesn't mean you aren't still responsible to teach your values and beliefs to them at home. You can still read to them, discuss important issues and even use what they are learning in public school as a spring board for some good character and values building conversations.
Spanking is not for infants! Spanking should not be the only form of punishment.
Select your instrument according to the child’s size,” writes Pearl. “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-eighth inch 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.” Additional advice from their Web site: Switching with a length of quarter-inch plumbing supply line is a “real attention-getter.”
He paints a picture of God as a punisher.
"No chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous... (Heb. 12:11)." God's chastisement is a painful "whipping." Our "fathers of the flesh... chastened us after their own pleasure... (12: 9, 10)." The Scripture not only condones physical "scourging," but promotes it as a means to holiness--when ministered for the son's "profit."
The chastisement is represented as a sure sign of love: "for whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth. " If there is no chastisement, it is not only an indication of not being loved, but of being a "bastard" So we see that out of the very love of God springs chastisement. Thus, our original passage in Prov. 13:24, "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. "
If God's love is expressed by the "whippings" He gives, then can we not love our children enough to chasten them unto holiness? I have heard a rebellious teenager say, "If they only loved me enough to whip me."
There is a time and place for discipline, but this man's whole emphasis seems to be about punishment. Really, if you set the boundaries and have guidelines, your whole day doesn't have to be about punishment. And I'm talking about your average child, not the ones who came to you with serious emotional and behavioral issues. Even then, the emphasis should be on teaching other things such as life skills, bonding and attachment and shared activities.
I would reserve the physical punishment for outright defiance. With the twins, we give them a chance to correct the behavior. Next we move to jumping jacks. This replaces time out for us because they just brood in time out. So we get some energy out. And it doesn't harm them. One tends to be lazy so it's a better thing for him that being told to sit, which is what he wants to do anyway! If that doesn't work, we sent them to think on their bed, or if it's evening, we send them to bed. If that fails, then we spank. So it's the third or fourth option. And it's three swats, not ten like the Pearls suggest. It's one extra if they kick, bite etc. during the three swats. One likes to take off running and at first I'd chase her, but then she was winning so now I just wait. And she gets the fourth swat.
Pearl says, Don't think of the rod as a weapon of defense or a show of force; think of the rod as a "magic wand."