Hearing testimony tracks 5 year old Brooklyn Holcomb's final hours

http://www.bdtonline.com/siteSearch/...026123514.html


Hearing testimony tracks ... Brooklyn's final hours

By TAMMIE TOLER
Princeton Times

— PRINCETON — As a community struggled to cope with the death of
5-year-old Brooklyn Holcomb, a preliminary hearing this week traced the
Jan. 15 events that brought her to the emergency room unconscious,
covered in bruises and bearing what appeared to be the imprint of a belt
buckle.
Prosecuting Attorney Timm Boggess questioned first the emergency room
physician who treated the battered girl and then the detective charged
with identifying what killed her.
Ronald William Holcomb never raised his head.
The 34-year-old veteran and prison guard charged with first-degree
murder sat at the defense table, with his eyes lowered, flanked by his
attorneys, Tom Janutolo, Tim Harvey and Joe Harvey.
When asked a question by his attorney, he nodded, and he briefly looked
up at a piece of wood he allegedly used as a paddle the day Brooklyn
Holcomb lost consciousness.
Magistrate Mike Flanagan presided over the proceedings, as Boggess and
his witnesses outlined the events that opened a murder investigation.
PCH Emergency Room physician Dr. Ammar Almehmi was the first to take the
stand.
The doctor said he saw 5-year-old Brooklyn Holcomb for the first time,
as she lay on an ER bed, unconscious. Her pupils were already fixed and
dialated and did not react to light.
“That tells me there is some injury to her neurologic system,” he said.
Knowing PCH was not equipped to offer neurological surgery on the scale
the child could need, Almehmi said he immediately began communicating
with hospitals in Charleston and Roanoke, Va., in attempt to find treatment.
As he waited on word from the hospitals and the transport that would
take Brooklyn Holcomb on to another facility, Almehmi said he began a
secondary examination that revealed multiple bruises on the child’s body.
“There were too many bruises,” he said.
The most disturbing part of the examination, Almehmi said, occurred when
workers turned the girl over and saw the condition of her buttocks,
allegedly beaten to the point that the skin was raw, bruised, broken and
swollen all over.
“Her butt was kind of like raw meat,” Almehmi testified.
At that point, he said PCH officials immediately contacted Child
Protective Services and law enforcement authorities.
In addition to bruises on Brooklyn Holcomb’s chin, and cheek, there was
also a large wound, approximately three inches in diameter, on the back
of her head, Almehmi testified.
A CT scan later showed there was severe swelling in the girl’s brain.
When the doctor talked with Ronald Holcomb, Almehmi testified that the
father told him Brooklyn Holcomb had a bleeding disorder that made her
bruise easily and that she had “banged herself against something”
earlier in the day and called for help.
Almehmi testified that Holcomb said he was feeding his 7-month-old child
and told Brooklyn Holcomb to go to bed. When he checked on her later, he
allegedly told the doctor she was unconscious.
As Joe Harvey questioned the doctor, he asked whether Brooklyn Holcomb’s
bruising and head injury could be consistent with falling down the
stairs in the white, two-story home Holcomb, his wife and four children
lived in.
Almehmi said he could not speculate on the cause of the wounds, only
that they were there.
“I know I can just tell you I found a bruise. What is the reason? I
don’t know,” he said.
As the hearing shifted to a law enforcement angle, Boggess called
Princeton Police Det. Sgt. C.N. Poe to the stand.
Poe testified he arrived as Almehmi and nurses attempted to treat
Brooklyn Holcomb, who he believed, “basically, had been beaten.”
At one point, he said the doctor looked up and said, “She’s not going to
make it.”
Poe said he immediately began taking photographs of the girl and the
various wounds that were obvious externally. Along with a host of less
severe bruises that covered her body, Poe counted one on her chin, one
under her right eye, one behind her ear, what appeared to be a handprint
on her abdomen, a severe wound on the back of her head, marks on her
neck that appeared as if she had been strangled, and extreme bruising on
the small of her back, buttocks and upper-back thighs.
Poe said said he had never conducted any beating investigation in which
the victim was as extensively wounded as Brooklyn Holcomb.
“Plain and simply, it was a physical beating,” the officer said,
describing the injury under her eye as one from a blunt object and a
“scuff-type” injury on her lower abdomen, just above the genital area.
As medical officials worked to find a way to get the little girl more
treatment with winter weather grounding all flights, Poe talked with
Holcomb. The father was allowed to see the girl one more time before an
ambulance took her to Charleston and he was arrested.
During a formal statement, Poe said Holcomb admitted to spanking
Brooklyn, possibly with too much force.
“He explained that at approximately 9:30 [a.m.], he had fed Brooklyn her
breakfast, and she wouldn’t eat it,” Poe said, adding that he said
Brooklyn either spit the food out or made herself spit up.
According to Holcomb’s statement, he did allegedly spank her for that,
with a paddle, possibly “a little too hard.” He later sent her upstairs,
where Holcomb said she hurt herself, Poe testified.
“He said she threw herself down on the floor and that she had a tendency
of falling down the stairs,” Poe said.
In the early afternoon, Poe said Holcomb told him Brooklyn complained of
a headache, prompting him to have her lie down on a day bed at the home.
When he went to wake her, Holcomb reportedly said she did not wake up.
At that point, the defendant allegedly packed up the other children at
the residence and took them to another family member before returning to
get Brooklyn Holcomb and drive her to the hospital.
Once Holcomb was in custody at the Princeton Police Department, Poe said
he noticed there was skin missing from Holcomb’s knuckles, a sign, the
officer said, meant the man had repeatedly struck something, hard.
“On his hands, knuckles, there was skin gone, as if you would strike
something and scuff the skin off your hand,” Poe said.
As authorities searched for evidence in the Holcomb household , Poe said
they found some bloody rags in the garbage. Although officers located
piece of wood at the house, Poe said Officer J.W. Howell had remained
unconvinced it was the paddle Holcomb admitted to hitting his daughter with.
Holcomb’s wife later turned in a piece of wood approximately 3 inches
wide and one-half an inch thick that was believed to be the paddle in
question, Poe testified. He said he believed it was located “under a bed
upstairs.”
Holcomb did look up briefly as Boggess passed the piece of wood to the
defense counsel. He never raised his head.
More evidence surfaced after the little girl’s Jan. 17 death. On Jan.
19, Poe attended the autopsy conducted by Dr. Zia Sabet.
Poe testified the medical examiner found the injuries on Brooklyn
Holcomb’s buttocks and back to be consistent with that three-inch piece
of wood during the autopsy, which also revealed imprints of what
appeared to be a belt buckle on her butt and back of her leg.
There were imprints of her upper teeth in her lower gums, Poe said,
indicating someone had covered her mouth with enough force keep her
mouth closed and force the bruising, likely also stopping her breathing.
The officer said the medical examiner concluded that suffocation caused
the 5-year-old to lose consciousness but that the head trauma alone
would have been enough to claim her life.
“She was beat to death,” Poe testified.
The defense did not present opening or closing statements or introduce
any witnesses Wednesday, but they did imply Brooklyn’s medical
conditions could have contributed to her bruising and some behavioral
problems.
On different occasions, Holcomb’s attorneys questioned state witnesses
about their knowledge of a “bleeding disorder” and reactive attachment
disorder, a controversial psychological condition most often associated
with children who have been abused or have been part of extremely
unstable family life.
According to www.mental-health-matters.com, the disorder is
characterized by extreme fearfulness, poor social interaction and
aggression toward others or themselves.
Tim Harvey repeatedly asked Poe about the stairs at the Holcomb home,
asking for the rise and width of the stairs, as well as the number of
steps between stories and landings. He also asked if anyone collected
the child’s DNA from the bottom of the stairs.
“The injuries that she had all about her body were not consistent with
falling down the steps,” Poe said.
At the hearing’s close, Flanagan forwarded the case to the grand jury.
The panel convenes in February, but Boggess said it was unlikely
Holcomb’s case would be presented to this term.
Circuit Court Judge William Sadler denied bond in the case last week.
Holcomb will remain in custody, pending the grand jury review and
possible indictment.
— Contact Tammie Toler at .

Copyright © 1999-2006 cnhi, inc.

Who is Alice Miller?

A respected researcher.

What about Ms Miller?

A letter she sent Jordan Riak.
(English is not her native language).

http://www.nospank.net/miller30.htm

Her website

http://www.alice-miller.com/

On Feb 5, 6:49 am, "Firemonkey" wrote:
This is heartbreaking..I'm sure this guy was also big on spanking,
maybe thats how it started out.
firemonkey

There's a couple that do therapeutic work with families, Peiper is
their name, that wrote a few books on this subject parenting....how
children perceive how their caretakers treat them.

"Smart. Love, The compassionate alternative to discipline"
Powell's Books - Smart Love by Martha Heineman Pieper
No parent wants to be a disciplinarian, but most fear that the only
alternative is permissiveness. Not so, says Drs. Martha and William
Pieper, ...
http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/bibli...781558321823-1 - 24k -

They note, in discussing how children react to the parent: The child
believes the parent is parenting them exactly as they deserve to be
parented.

Now that's a thought. What did the little girl, Brooklyn Holcomb,
believe as she was being beaten to death?

Kane



On Feb 5, 5:25 am, "spd" wrote:

On Feb 4, 7:36 pm, "0:-" wrote:

http://www.bdtonline.com/siteSearch/...l_story_026123....

Hearing testimony tracks ... Brooklyn's final hours

By TAMMIE TOLER
Princeton Times

- PRINCETON - As a community struggled to cope with the death of
5-year-old Brooklyn Holcomb, a preliminary hearing this week traced the
Jan. 15 events that brought her to the emergency room unconscious,
covered in bruises and bearing what appeared to be the imprint of a belt
buckle.
Prosecuting Attorney Timm Boggess questioned first the emergency room
physician who treated the battered girl and then the detective charged
with identifying what killed her.
Ronald William Holcomb never raised his head.
The 34-year-old veteran and prison guard charged with first-degree
murder sat at the defense table, with his eyes lowered, flanked by his
attorneys, Tom Janutolo, Tim Harvey and Joe Harvey.
When asked a question by his attorney, he nodded, and he briefly looked
up at a piece of wood he allegedly used as a paddle the day Brooklyn
Holcomb lost consciousness.
Magistrate Mike Flanagan presided over the proceedings, as Boggess and
his witnesses outlined the events that opened a murder investigation.
PCH Emergency Room physician Dr. Ammar Almehmi was the first to take the
stand.
The doctor said he saw 5-year-old Brooklyn Holcomb for the first time,
as she lay on an ER bed, unconscious. Her pupils were already fixed and
dialated and did not react to light.
"That tells me there is some injury to her neurologic system," he said.
Knowing PCH was not equipped to offer neurological surgery on the scale
the child could need, Almehmi said he immediately began communicating
with hospitals in Charleston and Roanoke, Va., in attempt to find treatment.
As he waited on word from the hospitals and the transport that would
take Brooklyn Holcomb on to another facility, Almehmi said he began a
secondary examination that revealed multiple bruises on the child's body.
"There were too many bruises," he said.
The most disturbing part of the examination, Almehmi said, occurred when
workers turned the girl over and saw the condition of her buttocks,
allegedly beaten to the point that the skin was raw, bruised, broken and
swollen all over.
"Her butt was kind of like raw meat," Almehmi testified.
At that point, he said PCH officials immediately contacted Child
Protective Services and law enforcement authorities.
In addition to bruises on Brooklyn Holcomb's chin, and cheek, there was
also a large wound, approximately three inches in diameter, on the back
of her head, Almehmi testified.
A CT scan later showed there was severe swelling in the girl's brain.
When the doctor talked with Ronald Holcomb, Almehmi testified that the
father told him Brooklyn Holcomb had a bleeding disorder that made her
bruise easily and that she had "banged herself against something"
earlier in the day and called for help.
Almehmi testified that Holcomb said he was feeding his 7-month-old child
and told Brooklyn Holcomb to go to bed. When he checked on her later, he
allegedly told the doctor she was unconscious.
As Joe Harvey questioned the doctor, he asked whether Brooklyn Holcomb's
bruising and head injury could be consistent with falling down the
stairs in the white, two-story home Holcomb, his wife and four children
lived in.
Almehmi said he could not speculate on the cause of the wounds, only
that they were there.
"I know I can just tell you I found a bruise. What is the reason? I
don't know," he said.
As the hearing shifted to a law enforcement angle, Boggess called
Princeton Police Det. Sgt. C.N. Poe to the stand.
Poe testified he arrived as Almehmi and nurses attempted to treat
Brooklyn Holcomb, who he believed, "basically, had been beaten."
At one point, he said the doctor looked up and said, "She's not going to
make it."
Poe said he immediately began taking photographs of the girl and the
various wounds that were obvious externally. Along with a host of less
severe bruises that covered her body, Poe counted one on her chin, one
under her right eye, one behind her ear, what appeared to be a handprint
on her abdomen, a severe wound on the back of her head, marks on her
neck that appeared as if she had been strangled, and extreme bruising on
the small of her back, buttocks and upper-back thighs.
Poe said said he had never conducted any beating investigation in which
the victim was as extensively wounded as Brooklyn Holcomb.
"Plain and simply, it was a physical beating," the officer said,
describing the injury under her eye as one from a blunt object and a
"scuff-type" injury on her lower abdomen, just above the genital area.
As medical officials worked to find a way to get the little girl more
treatment with winter weather grounding all flights, Poe talked with
Holcomb. The father was allowed to see the girl one more time before an
ambulance took her to Charleston and he was arrested.
During a formal statement, Poe said Holcomb admitted to spanking
Brooklyn, possibly with too much force.
"He explained that at approximately 9:30 [a.m.], he had fed Brooklyn her
breakfast, and she wouldn't eat it," Poe said, adding that he said
Brooklyn either spit the food out or made herself spit up.
According to Holcomb's statement, he did allegedly spank her for that,
with a paddle, possibly "a little too hard." He later sent her upstairs,
where Holcomb said she hurt herself, Poe testified.
"He said she threw herself down on the floor and that she had a tendency
of falling down the stairs," Poe said.
In the early afternoon, Poe said Holcomb told him Brooklyn complained of
a headache, prompting him to have her lie down on a day bed at the home.
When he went to wake her, Holcomb reportedly said she did not wake up.
At that point, the defendant allegedly packed up the other children at
the residence and took them to another family member before returning to
get Brooklyn Holcomb and drive her to the hospital.
Once Holcomb was in custody at the Princeton Police Department, Poe said
he noticed there was skin missing from Holcomb's knuckles, a sign, the
officer said, meant the man had repeatedly struck something, hard.
"On his hands, knuckles, there was skin gone, as if you would strike
something and scuff the skin off your hand," Poe said.
As authorities searched for evidence in the Holcomb household , Poe said
they found some bloody rags in the garbage. Although officers located
piece of wood at the house, Poe said Officer J.W. Howell had remained
unconvinced it was the paddle Holcomb admitted to hitting his daughter with.
Holcomb's wife later turned in a piece of wood approximately 3 inches
wide and one-half an inch thick that was believed to be the paddle in
question, Poe testified. He said he believed it was located "under a bed
upstairs."
Holcomb did look up briefly as Boggess passed the piece of wood to the
defense counsel. He never raised his head.
More evidence surfaced after the little girl's Jan. 17 death. On Jan.
19, Poe attended the autopsy conducted by Dr. Zia Sabet.
Poe testified the medical examiner found the injuries on Brooklyn
Holcomb's buttocks and back to be consistent with that three-inch piece
of wood during the autopsy, which also revealed imprints of what
appeared to be a belt buckle on her butt and back of her leg.
There were imprints of her upper teeth in her lower gums, Poe said,
indicating someone had covered her mouth with enough force keep her
mouth closed and force the bruising, likely also stopping her breathing.
The officer said the medical examiner concluded that suffocation caused
the 5-year-old to lose consciousness but that the head trauma alone
would have been enough to claim her life.
"She was beat to death," Poe testified.
The defense did not present opening or closing statements or introduce
any witnesses Wednesday, but they did imply Brooklyn's medical
conditions could have contributed to her bruising and some behavioral
problems.
On different occasions, Holcomb's attorneys questioned state witnesses
about their knowledge of a "bleeding disorder" and reactive attachment
disorder, a controversial psychological condition most often associated
with children who have been abused or have been part of extremely
unstable family life.
According towww.mental-health-matters.com, the disorder is
characterized by extreme fearfulness, poor social interaction and
aggression toward others or themselves.
Tim Harvey repeatedly asked Poe about the stairs at the Holcomb home,
asking for the rise and width of the stairs, as well as the number of
steps between stories and landings. He also asked if anyone collected
the child's DNA from the bottom of the stairs.
"The injuries that she had all about her body were not consistent with
falling down the steps," Poe said.
At the hearing's close, Flanagan forwarded the case to the grand jury.
The panel convenes in February, but Boggess said it was unlikely
Holcomb's case would be presented to this term.
Circuit Court Judge William Sadler denied bond in the case last week.
Holcomb will remain in custody, pending the grand jury review and
possible indictment.
- Contact Tammie Toler at .

Copyright © 1999-2006 cnhi, inc.

...

read more »

Greegor wrote:
To pretend the article is about spanking is idiotic.

It was about, as so much injurious physical abuse of children is,
"discipline."

You don't think he simply decided to kill the child do you?

Kane posted a link to this letter from Alice Miller.
Who is this person and what are her credentials Kane?

Why don't you find out, boy?

Maybe she's your mother.

You just can't stand the concept of kindness in raising children, Greg.
Your concept of children is obviously that they, children, set out to
defy and abuse adult caretakers. Isn't that right, Greg?

Else why would you punish a child for misjudgment (a six year old at
that) and a toileting accident.

By the way, a child's death at the hands of her parent IS on topic for
all groups I addressed to, coward.

Afraid for other's to see you brainless self indulgent child and family
hating comments, are you?

Try asking yourself how many times the death of a child at the hand of
her parent from physical assault DID NOT start out as "punishment."


From: Alice Miller (-----------)
To: Jordan Riak )
Sent: Monday, January 8, 2007, 9:28 AM
Subject: Plain Talk About Spanking

Dear Jordan,

Thank you so much for your clear, true, brave and convincing booklet.
It should be offered free to every parent immediately after the birth
of EACH of their children. The problem is that mothers spank their
toddlers as soon as they start to walk and touch "dangerous" things,
to teach them what they shouldn't touch "for their own good". In a
survey I ordered 4 years ago in France 100 women were asked when they
felt compelled to spank their child for the first time. 89 of them
answered: when the child was 18 months. 11 mothers said that they
didn't remember exactly the age of the child but NO ONE said that she
never spanked her child.

Today it happened to me that together with your mail I read an
interview with Bruce. D. Perry whose research on the child's brain I
very much appreciate. Now, I was very surprised by his statement that
fortunately only 20% of people who were maltreated become violent in
their later lives. I think that by saying this he may have forgotten
the violence directed towards children. I would say that almost
everybody who was maltreated in early childhood tends to minimize or
even glorify this kind of treatment. Their empathy for the pain of
children has been killed. For that reason most people don't realize
that spanking a child IS INDEED AN ACT OF VIOLENCE, THE MOST AWFUL AND
THE MOST DENIED WE CAN IMAGINE. Denied even by people who should know
better.

If you want you can publish this letter on your site and you can send
it to Dr. Perry (without my e-mail address).

With best wishes for the New Year,

Alice

On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, 0:- wrote:

Greegor wrote:
To pretend the article is about spanking is idiotic.

It was about, as so much injurious physical abuse of children is,
"discipline."

You don't think he simply decided to kill the child do you?

Kane posted a link to this letter from Alice Miller.
Who is this person and what are her credentials Kane?

Why don't you find out, boy?

Maybe she's your mother.

Hihihi! I did, Kane! Can you name one "peer-reviewed" study on
spanking done by her?

Doan

On 7 Feb 2007 10:07:32 -0800, "0:-" wrote:

Well, Greg,

This was an interesting thread that seemed to suddenly stop after the
post, my own, I've attributed below.

Seems that you made claims about Dr. Benjamen Spock, and I posted the
truth (yours were the usual propaganda lies) and you suddenly went
silent.

Nothing to say? No admission of error?

Just tucked your tail and ran, did you?

Please respond to your claims with proof, or comment on the proof I
provided that you were incorrect.

Thanks.

By the way, it's not being a loonie to be against spanking. It's
simply an opinion, Greg.

As is being for spanking. One of us is right, and the other wrong,
that's all.

In time the weight of evidence will prevail.

Kane


On Feb 7, 1:45 am, "Greegor" wrote:
So she has been an anti-spanking lobbyist for quite
some time. So has Jordan Riak.

What would you call Baumind and Larzerele, and Dobson, Greg?

Objective reporters, authors?

Has she associated with Dr. Professor Sir Roy Meadows?

Doesn't even deserve and answer.

Doctor Spock was an anti-spanking loony for YEARS
but in later life when he was an actual parent he found
out that lots of the stuff he preached was crap.
He reversed his position on spanking.

Gee, up to that sentence I thought you were wrong, then you proved
that by golly at least one thing you got right.

Yes, he certainly did "reverse his position on spanking," early in his
career he went from not disapproving spanking to a lifelong campaign
against right up to his death.

YOUR take is an urban legend, sonny, just like the one where Billy
Graham's daughter publically stated the Spock's son was a suicide.
More garbage.

You idiots are so enthralled with child torture in the name of your
various superstitions about children and their "danger" to adults,
that you'll lie and feed lies to each other endlessly.

And YOU, Greg, are the perfect dupe because YOU won't seek information
yourself.

Here's a few quotes from B. Spock and a bit more about him as well
with links.

Notice the LAST date of his book, and the year he died, and what he
said in that book, stupid:

http://www.nospank.net/spock2.htm

Dr. Benjamin Spock comments on spanking (1989)

* "In earlier decades--and in earlier editions of Baby and
Child Care--I avoided a flat statement of disapproval of physical
punishment. . . . What made me go against my own rule was a growing
concern over the sky-high and ever-rising figures for murders within
the family, wife abuse, and child abuse in America . . . " (p. 172)

* "[Physical punishment] certainly plays a role in our
acceptance of violence. If we are ever to turn toward a kindlier
society and a safer world, a revulsion against the physical punishment
of children would be a good place to start." (p. 173)

* "My other reasons for advising against physical
punishment are, in brief, that it teaches children that might makes
right, that it encourages some children to be bullies, and most
fundamentally, that to the degree that it results in good behavior
it's because of the fear of pain. I have a strong belief that the best
reason for behaving well is that you like people, want to get along
with them, want them to like you." (p. 173)

* "I don't think physical punishment is necessary or
particularly effective." (p. 215)

* "All schools should be friendly, creative places like
the best I've seen. We should wean ourselves away from physical
punishment." (p. 33)

* "A teacher who uses physical punishment or sends a
student to the principal for punishment has failed and has given up,
in my estimation. I don't care what the laws of the state or the board
of education say." (p. 251)

* "Recently I visited a small private school . . . with
the idea of asking children . . . what advice to parents they'd like
me to incorporate in the forthcoming revision of Baby and Child Care.
In a thoughtful mood, the class was unanimous that parents should not
hit their children. . . One child added that if you're crying and your
parent tells you to stop and then hits you when you don't stop, it
only makes you cry more." (p. 229-233)

* "I hope American parents can outgrow the
conviction . . . that physical punishment is necessary to bring up
well-behaved children. . . [T]here are parts of the world where it has
never occurred to any adult to strike a child. I have known personally
or professionally dozens of families in which the parents never lifted
a hand--or otherwise punished or humiliated their children--and yet
the children were ideally cooperative and polite. Children are eager
to be ever more grown up and responsible." (p. 13)

The following is from Baby and Child Care, 1998, pp. 437-438.
This was the last edition of Baby and Child Care. Dr. Spock died on
March 15, 1998.

* "There are several reasons to avoid physical punishment.
It teaches children that the larger, stronger person has the power to
get his way, whether or not he is in the right. Some spanked children
then feel quite justified in beating up on smaller ones. The American
tradition of spanking may be one reason there is much more violence in
our country than in any other comparable nation."

Dr. Spock was a member of the EPOCH-USA Board of Directors
right up until the time of his death. Thus, he was so strongly
committed to never, ever hitting children, that he loaned his name in
support of the no-hitting cause!

Benjamin Spock, M.D. died on March 15, 1998.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/spankin2.htm

--- In the 1930's: Surveys showed that over 90% of parents spanked
their children, some three generations ago. Dr. Benjamin Spock
originally endorsed spanking, but then changed his mind in the late
1980's. ...


http://www.snopes.com/medical/doctor/drspock.asp

The confusion over who died in Dr. Spock's family has been picked up
and repeated widely because some choose to see this mistaken tidbit
not only as compellingly ironic but as a telling condemnation of the
doctor's teachings. Dr. Spock's book Baby and Child Care was published
in 1946, just in time for the post-World War II baby boom. It became
the widely-accepted bible on child rearing, and much of the advice Dr.
Spock offered therein ran against the grain of what had previously
been the accepted standard for bringing up children. Spock encouraged
parents to treat their offspring with respect rather than arm
themselves with leather belts put to use at the first sign of
disobedience. This led some critics to call him the "Father of
Permissiveness" even though he advocated disciplining one's children,
just not beating them.

The following snippet harvested from a 2002 embellishment of the 2001
remarks on the September 11 tragedy offered by the daughter of
evangelist Billy Graham provides an example of the context in which
this rumor is often promulgated:

Then, Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when
they misbehave because their little personalities would be warped and
we might damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock's son committed suicide)
and we said, an expert should know what he's talking about so we said
OK.

In this instance the fallacious 'son committed suicide' claim is used
to support a position that Dr. Spock's teachings were dangerously
wrong and should be thrown out with the baby's bathwater. "How much of
an expert could he have been," we're supposed to muse, "if his own son
was driven to suicide? Maybe corporal punishment is the right way to
go, seeing as how eschewing the belt led to that result." But whether
spanking is ultimately helpful or harmful, neither of Dr. Spock's sons
killed himself. Those who hold up the "suicided son" tidbit as their
shining proof that the world went to hell in a handbasket because
parents listened to wrongheaded experts rather than keeping faith with
their sturdy Sam Brownes only make fools of themselves, because their
example is wrong.

An ironic twist to this legend is that it is true about a psychologist
who advocated a child-rearing approach diametrically opposed to the
one Dr. Spock would later champion:

By the late 1920s, John B. Watson, the notably harsh but popular
behavioral psychologist, combined rigorous views on child care with a
dire estimation of the dangers of maternal affection. "Mother love is
a dangerous instrument. An instrument which may inflict a never
healing wound . . . which may make infancy unhappy, adolescence a
nightmare, an instrument which may wreck your adult son or daughter's
vocational future and their chances for marital happiness." Parents
were advised to "never hug or kiss [their children]. Never let them
sit on your lap. If you must, kiss them once on the forehead when you
say goodnight."

Watson's son, William, committed suicide at age 40. (A similar but
apocryphal tale is attached to the child of another behavioralist, B.
F. Skinner.)

Try getting real information, Greg:

http://www.drspock.com/faq/bio/0,200...TICLES,00.html

By the way, a little aside; the actress, Mariette Hartley (the one
that did those photo film ads years ago with James Garner) was the
granddaughter of John B. Watson of behaviorist fame, complained that
she suffered from her parents following old man Watson's brand of
child rearing.

Kane




On Feb 6, 2:45 pm, "0:-" wrote:

On Feb 6, 12:05 pm, Doan wrote:

On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, 0:- wrote:
Greegor wrote:
To pretend the article is about spanking is idiotic.

It was about, as so much injurious physical abuse of children is,
"discipline."

You don't think he simply decided to kill the child do you?

Kane posted a link to this letter from Alice Miller.
Who is this person and what are her credentials Kane?

Why don't you find out, boy?

Maybe she's your mother.

Who can you tell he's going to lie?

Hihihi!

Yes, there you go.

Starting with a lie, I see.

I did, Kane! Can you name one "peer-reviewed" study on
spanking done by her?

No. Are you suggesting she doesn't research for her many books?

http://www.naturalchild.org/alice_mi...ver_right.html
appeared in the September 7, 1999 Times of London,

... Miller's theory doesn't rest only on her observations as a
psychoanalyst. She has found confirmation in the latest research by
neurobiologists who have proved the influence of experiences during
the first three years of life to the developing structure of the
brain. ...

Significance of "peer review" would be, given your own poor record in
this area?

You seemed more than willing not only to tout Baumrind but insist,
with a lie, that her Berkeley address was fully approved of by
Straus.

Aren't you ever going to stop lying, or do you think you are justified
in some special way?

And I'm glad you asked, as Miller's work has been reviewed by her
peers.

Brief Thoughts on Reading the Works of Alice Miller
Lucien X. Lombardo
Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice
Old Dominion University
Norfolk, VA 23529

757-683-3800



November 27, 2001
When I first read Alice Miller's work I felt like I had encountered a
kindred spirit. It's always that way when I come across a person whose
life work is dedicated to looking through and passed those ideas that
so many of us have taken for granted for so long. Alice Miller's
writings challenge, clarify and put before us truths that so much of
what we learn tries to hide.

I was first exposed to the writings of Alice Miller when my colleague,
Dr. Karen Polonko, referred me to FOR YOUR OWN GOOD. For many years I
had been teaching a course called Understanding Violence, and Karen
had given me the key to understanding the 'enemy-making process' as it
relates to the relationship between children and adults. When
discussing relationships between adults and their children, I felt
uneasy with the word 'enemy'. 'Enemy' was a word that fit when
discussing hate violence, institutional violence and war. Somehow,
however, it was inadequate to an understanding of the relationships
between children and adults. With regard to this relationship, 'enemy'
seemed to have connotations for my students that interfered and
confused their thinking. Enemy for them had an international flavor.
For my students, enemies were communists (if raised during the cold
war), or Sadam for those raised after the cold war.

With my introduction to the writings of Alice Miller, the adult child
relationship and its connection to violence against children became
much clearer. After reading of 'Poisonous Pedagogy', I understood that
'the other' and 'the different' were much more important words to
understand this aspect of violence in the lives of children. I
understood the adult need to maintain this difference, to separate
themselves from children and indeed from their own childhoods. The
persistence of this approach to adult-child relationships throughout
the centuries gave voice to my understanding of adult behaviors and
attitudes toward children. I now saw how the belief in the necessity
of controlling and restricting children's behaviors and adult-centered
attitudes toward children (which value adults and devalue children)
which now seem so 'natural', were really myths masking this poisonous
history. Recognizing this helped me discover and articulate the power
of alternative behaviors and attitudes which nurture and recognize
children (and our childhoods) as our companions in living.

It was reading Alice Miller's work that I begin to understand another
perspective on childhood and child development. I realized that our
approach to child development relegated childhood to the shortest
period in our lives. However, Alice Miller taught me to think
differently. If our childhoods are always with us, then childhood is
the longest period of our lives. Childhood's traumas and nurturings
travel with us from the beginning to the end. They never leave us and
we never leave our childhoods. We do not somehow 'develop out' of
childhood, we continually wrestle with and draw upon our childhoods.
This is a powerful perspective. It informs us and makes childhood and
its experiences valuable to adults as nothing else does. If we can
make childhood valuable to adults then maybe we can make children
valuable as well. And since we nurture and not hurt what we value,
seeing childhood as valuable might make nurturing children more
important than controlling them.

Finally, Alice Miller also showed me the dark power of not facing the
truth. Her writings helped me recognize how many of our denials in
relation to violence of all types (or the vastness of the nastiness we
have towards each other) have their roots in the depths of the
childhoods we carry with us throughout our lives. Our tendency to
redefine violence as something other than violence, our tendency to
deny the harm of violence, our tendency to blame victims upon whom we
inflict violence, all of these techniques for making bad into good,
reflect our defensive reactions to the violations of our dignity
experienced as the first victims of violence, ourselves as children.

In her latest book, THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE, Alice Miller
summarizes, synthesizes and builds upon her earlier work. Here she
finds support for her vision in recent research on brain development
in children. In this research we began to see clear evidence for and
explanation of the process that makes our adult perspectives on
childhood a part of our childhood struggles to survive by coping with
childhood trauma. In this book Alice Miller provides an accessible
guide to understanding and breaking the centuries old 'cycle of
violence'. In addition, she helps provide insight into how
acknowledging our childhood experiences can help in developing a
'cycle of nurturing' that can lead us as individuals and a culture in
more authentic, engaged and creative directions.

The writings of Alice Miller strike a cord that resonates with the
underlying characteristics of our culture. Forced for so long to deny
the authenticity of our childhood and the creative selves that we
lost, we create a culture immersed in phoniness and virtual lives and
images. Having had to deny our substance as children we created
culture without substance. We emphasize method and technique and loose
sight of substance, purpose and meaning. Alice Miller's insights make
visible the struggle of creativity after trauma and the joy and
connectedness of creativity without trauma. These writings point to a
way out of the 'cultural knot' (drawing on R.D. Laing's KNOTS) that
our adult relationships with children and with our own childhoods
create and perpetuate. In nurturing creativity in children we nurture
creativity in ourselves. In contacting the authenticity of children,
we contact authenticity in our adult lives. Symbols and images
represented in the adult / childhood categories disintegrate under the
power of the real. What is in the immediate takes on new value and
demands new attention. This is what I take away from my reading of
Alice Miller's work. I thank her for her daring and courage in
bringing these insights to the attention of so many.
......................

You never quite catch on what a great help you are to the cause of
ending the abuses of child assault called "spanking."

Doan

By the way, since your little buddy Ken seems to have run like the
lying dog he is, perhaps you'd like to take up his claim...unless of
course YOU agree that he lied, that not spanking children puts them at
special risk of developing 'sociopathy.'

If you don't answer in the affirmative and show me that research
(you've got his email addy, right) then he lied, and you lied, and
you are still lying. And you'll always lie. Next time you see your
parents ask them how they think you learned to lie. They certainly
tried hard enough to make you honest. Seems they failed.

Bibliography: Miller, Alice

Miller, Alice,
___.The Truth Will Set You Free--Overcoming Emotional Blindness and
Finding Your True Adult Self. New York: Basic Books Group, 2001.

___. Paths of Life: Seven Scenarios. New York: Pantheon Books, 1998.

___. Breaking Down the Wall of Silence. London: Virago, 1991.

___. Thou Shalt Not Be Awa Society's Betrayal of the Child. New
York: New American Library, 1984.

___. For Your Own Good: Hidden Cruelty in Child Rearing and the Roots
of Violence. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1983.

___. Prisoners of Childhood: The Drama of the Gifted Child and the
Search for the True Self. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1981.- Hide quoted text -

-

...

read more »

Kane wrote
This was an interesting thread that seemed to suddenly stop after the
post, my own, I've attributed below.

Seems that you made claims about Dr. Benjamen Spock, and I posted the
truth (yours were the usual propaganda lies) and you suddenly went
silent.

Nothing to say? No admission of error?

Just tucked your tail and ran, did you?

Geez, psycho! I'm gone for a few days and you're
writing this crap? Take your freakin' meds you spaz.

On Feb 11, 3:22 pm, "Greegor" wrote:
Kane wrote

This was an interesting thread that seemed to suddenly stop after the
post, my own, I've attributed below.

Seems that you made claims about Dr. Benjamen Spock, and I posted the
truth (yours were the usual propaganda lies) and you suddenly went
silent.

Nothing to say? No admission of error?

Just tucked your tail and ran, did you?

Geez, psycho! I'm gone for a few days and you're
writing this crap? Take your freakin' meds you spaz.

My apologies, Greg. I had no idea you had lost the thread because you
were gone for a few days.

Let's take it up again then, shall we?

Would you like me, when you are gone for awhile, to bring you up to
date and remind you of the unfinished threads?

Happy to help.

By the way, a quick check of your posting shows that after my post on
February 7th, the one you aborted the attributions from, you had a
total of 19 posts..February 7 through the 8th, and no day when you
didn't post.

You posted your comment mentioning that Benjamin Spock turned away
from nonspanking to spanking, on the 7th at about 1 am, I replied to
you that same day at 10am or so.

You posted 17 times total, Feb 7th and 8th, yet could not bring
yourself to respond to my inquiry and corrections concerning your
claims about Spock. Odd, isn't it?

You seem a bit confused about being gone.

Can you explain this? Or will you pull a "Ken" and announce that you
have me right were you want me by letting me be there?

And of course this aside of yours about being gone and my spazing out
over it (R R RR like I give a ****) avoids you having to admit you
were mistaken or lying.

Would you care to clear this up now, or maybe go for a two year run
like the last time you tried to dodge your own error?

Or would this constitute psychological abuse, Greg?

0;]

Kane, How long have you been dodging the fact that
you are a mental case former Oregon caseworker?

You live (you say) in a security community full of
retired government agents.

If you really want security then why did you
post public obscenity for a year and why do you
attempt to torment or sabotage people?

You seem to think you are superior
because you put people down.

You have ACTIVELY CULTIVATED large amounts
of animus. Isn't that just a bit incompatible
with having personal security?

On Feb 11, 4:45 pm, "Greegor" wrote:
Kane, How long have you been dodging the fact that
you are a mental case former Oregon caseworker?

How long have you been making that claim, with requests to provide
proof and like any mental case, failing to provide that proof?

You live (you say) in a security community full of
retired government agents.

Naw, we got lots of kinds of folks here. Just happen to be many (not
"full") retired military and police.

If you really want security then why did you
post public obscenity for a year and why do you
attempt to torment or sabotage people?

The First Amendment ring any bells for you?

Are you suggesting I should not exercise my civil rights?

You seem to think you are superior
because you put people down.

Your 'seem' and mine do not run the same direction, little boy.

You have ACTIVELY CULTIVATED large amounts
of animus.

I've met very few people that insisted on the truth that didn't ruffle
feathers.

Isn't that just a bit incompatible
with having personal security?

Yep.

So?

Would you give up your right to speak for your personal security? Or
would you take advantage of various freedoms we have to do
both...maintain personal security and speak out?

You seem terribly confused for someone that invokes our Bill of Rights
so often, Greg.

It's what allows me to speak my mind, and you to speak yours, without
fear of loss of protections that goes with it.

Are you trying to shut me up, drive me away, from a public forum,
Greg?

Or are you just wishing?

You have the right to try and do any or all of those, Greg. Up to a
point.

Just how hard are you willing to work to attempt to drive me away, and
are you sure where the line is between your right of free speach, and
mine?

0:-]