As a conservative evangelical, I feel I have the right to ask, what is it with our Christian parenting books that are so quick to label every misbehavior as sin rather than take into account the common grace of research into early childhood development?
If I implemented her method, I'm certain it would leave my children resentful of God and His Word after every lengthy lecture. Hubbard's method seems to only utilize scripture to discipline rather than to edify or encourage. I even felt myself drawing back as she outlined pop scripture for each specific behavioral issue. The result would be very obedient, legalistic, exasperated children.
When we reduce every misbehavior as sin, it not only utilizes God’s Word as ammunition only, but reduces creativity on our part in equipping our kids with the tools to cope with tough emotions. Moralizing every imperfection doesnt take into account where kids are developmentally. While it's good to get to the heart of behavioral issues, little kids especially need tangible tools to deal with intangible emotions. Are we expecting a lengthy lecture and a couple Bible verses alone to do the trick? I also take issue with Hubbard's definition of obedience: obey all the way, right away and with a happy heart. While we can more readily address the promptness and quality of a child's obedience, the heart issue is a different manner. Do it without grumbling or complaint? Sure. But this is all easier said than done, and if cornered, kids can very easily mask a grumbling spirit. It takes more time to convince them of the why behind a command. That requires trust in us as parents rather than flippantly telling them to have a"happy heart."
There were certain chapters than implemented actual tools, like giving a 5-minute warning so your defiant child can wrap up an activity. Or having an interrupting child place their hand on yours when they have something to say. More of these with about half the lecture that goes along with it, please. As other reviews have mentioned, this book could have benefited from having two separate sections for each chapter: brief responses for little kids and more lengthy teaching moments for older kids.
Can we also get over the fear that acknowledging hard, "sinful" feelings that lead to complaining, whining, etc. is giving permission for those feelings? Don't we need to identify the fear, anger, grief behind these responses in order to embrace the fruits of the spirit instead? Hubbard seems to skip the former and aims for a shallow heart change just because the Bible says so. For example, Hubbard tells of a time when her daughter didn't get the part she wanted in the school play. Hubbard's "encouraging" reply was, "Honey, it's not the end of the world. There will be other plays," then later throws in a couple of verses about being faithful with little. Could she not have ackowledged how disappointing it was for her daughter?? Her daughter's sin of complaining probably could've been minimized had she actually felt cared for by her mom from the start. Are we really that scared of "bad" emotions? Maybe it's easier to teach against them than hold a moment of sympathy.