Dr.Phil: Overindulgence as child abuse?

What was the rationale for calling overindulgence abuse? Or is "abuse" the new word to get our attention regarding any parenting choice Dr. Phil deems less than optimal?

BlueLucario said:

You have something against this person?

Click to expand...

Huh? I asked you a question. Let me put it more clearly: What was Dr. Phil's rationale for calling overindulgence "abuse"?

If I have something against someone, I'll let you know up front.

WTF?

You could argue that overindulging a child leaves them very poorly equipped to become decent adults. You could be damming them to become the sort of self-obsessed, instant gratification pricks that everyone hates and also possibly lead them into a life of debt, since they'll be very badly prepared for deferring enjoyment.

'Abuse' is an overused term for this sort of thing that devalues the word, really. Abuse is battering, severe neglect or sexual inteferance, in my book - not bringing up a kid in a way that might make them obnoxious when they're older.

No, it's not child abuse. It's called "bad parenting."

What James said.

BlueLucario said:

I'm sorry. I interpret it wrong.

I really have no idea. He thinks that kids don't understand the value of a dollar.

Click to expand...

It may be short-sighted to fail to teach them the value of a dollar, but I can't see calling it abuse.

Using the word "abuse" to describe things that fall short of abuse weakens the meaning of the word.

I ABSOLUTELY think that overindulgence could be considered abuse of a child. And I'm definitely not a Dr. Phil fan, either.


In some cases, we could argue that bad parenting is absolutely child abuse. Bad parenting is one reason behind some of the worst problems teachers have in schools with children. Parents who don't care enough about their kids to actively be in their lives (instead of buying them pacifiers like fast food and toys) and then send them off to school with attitudes that "the world is theirs" puts the teachers at a real disadvantage. It's so sad how some parents don't understand that parenting is the MOST IMPORTANT job they will ever have. They are responsible for raising their kids to be self-reliant, responsible adults. When those same parents simply pacify their kids, who will those kids grow up to be? If they grow up well, it will be in spite of their parents' efforts (or lack thereof)--it won't be because of it. It just boggles my mind how some parents think kids are like plants--water and feed them, and they'll figure the rest out on their own.

if you get anything you want whenever you want, will it make you happy?

I think not.

giving your kids everything they want when they want it despite it not being good for them either from a health aspect (too much fast food, booze in the house, etc.) or from a financial aspect (iPod, Wii, PSP and a new car before they're able to drive?) will cripple them emotionally and possibly physically when they become adults.

is it abuse? Depends, but if that's the word that's needed to get through to the parents that they're NOT helping their kids by letting them have everything then call it what you will.

Devil Ledbetter said:

What was the rationale for calling overindulgence abuse? Or is "abuse" the new word to get our attention regarding any parenting choice Dr. Phil deems less than optimal?

Click to expand...

BlueLucario said:

You have something against this person?

Click to expand...

Devil Ledbetter said:

Huh? I asked you a question. Let me put it more clearly: What was Dr. Phil's rationale for calling overindulgence "abuse"?

If I have something against someone, I'll let you know up front.

WTF?

Click to expand...

Wow--seriously, Devil, your first reply was clearly a jab. I'm stunned that you reacted to Blue as if you had no idea why you were asked if you have a problem with Dr. Phil. And then to reply again with "WTF?" Please. LOL!!!!!

People, if we send a jab out there, lets at least own up and acknowledge it when someone responds.

Carole said:

This is particularly true of children who are allowed to overindulge in food. The rate at which diabetes is showing up in children is staggering. My boys were always a very normal, healthy weight. One summer, they went to stay with their grandparents. I was shocked when I picked them up. Both boys were heavier, but my younger son was literally obese. I DID NOT RECOGNIZE my own son when I first saw him. It took him years to get his weight back under control. Finally, at nineteen, he is a good, healthy weight again. Their grandfather laughed when he talked about the midnight fried chicken feasts and trips to Dairy Queen.

Click to expand...

Oh Lord, God bless you and your sons for your grace, Carole. If that had been my child, I wouldn't have been able to restrain from estranging myself from those grandparents. What appalling behavior--to make a child obese over a single summer means forcing such gluttony upon him. And to LAUGH about it?? Ugh!

'Spoiling' is never a good thing when parenting. I've seen it far too often and it produces selfish little brats.

BlueLucario said:

I just saw something on Dr. Phil. I just found out that overindulging your child(buying him/her toys, video games, and McDonalds) is one of the most serious forms of abuse.

Click to expand...

Yes, overindulging a child is obviously far worse than sexually, physically or emotionally abusing a child...

Spoiling a child to the extent of 'abuse' (excuse the pun, but the phrase has become 'abused' itself) is bad parenting, it may leave them unprepared for adult life but that is not child abuse.

This is funny coming from Dr. Phil, who showered the Octomom in gifts and money. She's the last person who needed to be rewarded with her heart's desires for her actions. That man lost all credibility with me, not that he ever had much to begin with...

I can see how spoiling a child is bad for their psyche, but I wouldn't exactly call social services. There are plenty of battered children out there who I'm sure wish their parents "abused" them by buying them a Nintendo Wii.

Carole said:

Wow--seriously, Devil, your first reply was clearly a jab. I'm stunned that you reacted to Blue as if you had no idea why you were asked if you have a problem with Dr. Phil. And then to reply again with "WTF?" Please. LOL!!!!!

People, if we send a jab out there, lets at least own up and acknowledge it when someone responds.

Click to expand...

It wasn't a jab at Dr. Phil. I've been too busy to watch his show in years and have no "problem" with him or reason to jab him. I was seriously asking for clarification on how he meant the word "abuse" and she responded as though I attacked him. Hence my "WTF?"

Certainly Dr. Phil is known for being a opinionated, so I hardly think characterizing his viewpoint as something he "deems less than optimal" is a jab or proof I have "something against" him. In fact, "deems less than optimal" is pretty mild considering that he usually speaks in terms of black and white absolutes.

Regardless of your "LOL!!!!!" I don't appreciate the public attack and assailing of my sincerity. Next time you have a problem with me, you can PM me, report my post or contact a mod.

Blue, Dr Phil used the phrase "child abuse" because it is a highly charged topic that would get many people to watch his show, thereby making the sponsors happy, who want to make lots and lots of money. It has nothing to do with whether indulging children is actually tantamount to "child abuse".

goes back into grumpy corner

TerzaRima said:

Blue, Dr Phil used the phrase "child abuse" because it is a highly charged topic that would get many people to watch his show, thereby making the sponsors happy, who want to make lots and lots of money. It has nothing to do with whether indulging children is actually tantamount to "child abuse".

goes back into grumpy corner

Click to expand...

Yep. Nothing like a little hyperbole to boost your ratings.

TerzaRima said:

Blue, Dr Phil used the phrase "child abuse" because it is a highly charged topic that would get many people to watch his show, thereby making the sponsors happy, who want to make lots and lots of money. It has nothing to do with whether indulging children is actually tantamount to "child abuse".

Click to expand...

Good answer. Abuse = a buzz word.

... good point.
When the producers were putting together the show they probably tossed out other comparisons before deciding to go with the "child abuse" one, e.g.

Overindulgence is the most serious form of "torture."
Overindulgence is the most serious form of "poisoning."
Overindulgence is the most serious form of "cannibalism."
Overindulgence is the most serious form of ...

Ken said:

... good point.
When the producers were putting together the show they probably tossed out other comparisons before deciding to go with the "child abuse" one, e.g.

Overindulgence is the most serious form of "torture."
Overindulgence is the most serious form of "poisoning."
Overindulgence is the most serious form of "cannibalism."
Overindulgence is the most serious form of ...

Click to expand...

When you put it that way, saying "the most serious form of" seems even worse than calling it abuse. Of all the ways a child can be abused, beaten, burned, neglected, sexually assaulted, locked in a closet, starved, blamed, berated ... not teaching them the value of a dollar is "the most serious."

Uh, wow.

I hope it was a misquote.

Sheryl Nantus said:

is it abuse? Depends, but if that's the word that's needed to get through to the parents that they're NOT helping their kids by letting them have everything then call it what you will.

Click to expand...

You don't get through to people by "shocking" them with over-dramatic words.

I refer to the War on Drugs and cigarettes for how effective that tactic is.

... yep. If they had to make the child abuse comparison, to draw in audiences, they could have shortened it to:

Overindulgence is a form of child abuse.

... which would've been slightly more reasonable.

But to say it is "the most serious form of child abuse" is, indeed, ludicrous when the matter is considered.

ps This really does have to be a "misquote."