Before I make my point, let me state up front: I agree with many herein that this woman has no sense of boundaries and is abusing her children in pursuit of her own rebellion. So, we're clear: I do not see her parenting "model" as one that could possibly lead to happy, secure, and healthy children.
Having said that, I am also disappointed, albeit not at all surprised, that the Dr. Phil show "selected" this "family" to appear. It's rare on this show to see a parent who disagrees with Dr. Phil's presumptions about what constitutes "appropriateness" in terms of adult sexual practice and sexual education.
For those who have posted with the paranoid and misinformed right-wing talking points about abstinence as the only "responsible" way to approach teenage sexual awakening, I hope you consider looking beyond biased souces. For those areas in the U.S. where "abstinence only" programs have been put in place, STD and unwanted pregnancy rates GO UP, not down! Further, there's some solid studies showing that "abstinence only"-barraged teens have considerably higher rates of anal and oral sex. In other words, abstinence only education makes teenagers less, not more, safe.
So, my frustration here is that this show "paints" responsible and reality-based parenting as irresponsible and immoral. Teenagers have a right to know about their bodies and to know what the REASONABLE risks are--both physical AND emotional--when they become sexually active. And, face it, folks--they overwhelming majority of human beings become sexually active before marriage. Teaching your children self-respect and self-knowledge prepares them to make better choices. It DOES NOT teach promiscuity, endorse deviant sex practices, or guarantee STDs or pregnancy. (An example: Oprah regularly does shows on the increasingly common phenom of middle-school girls giving out oral sex in order to be popular. If a girl loved her body and understood the emotional, spiritual, and physical consequences of having sex before she's ready, she would be very unlikely to treat herself and others in that way. I also think that girl's who know about female orgasm would not tolerate being treated as sexual servants--they would demand respect and balance, something they would be unlikely to find among adolescent boys.)
So, I would argue that parents preaching morally self-righteous abstinence IN COMBINATION with the hypersexualized images of our culture leave our kids in a vacuum, or to put it better, puts them in harm's way. They're getting equally unhealthy and unreasonable "lessons" from both ends.
Instead of allowing my perspective on Dr. Phil, the show "voices" birth control education through a woman who is emotionally unstable, selfish, and abusive toward her children. (Case in point: owning or using sex toys is not "deviant"--displaying them as trophies for your children, however, is.) Personally, I found the "choice" of this guest both irresponsible and reprehensible. But, that choice also selects for the moralistic outrage that suffuses this message board. Perhaps, then, Dr. Phil is pandering to the morally self-righteous at the expense of adolescent health?
Admit it, you've judged people for doing things you considered inappropriate and abnormal in public. Meet Margaret, a stay-at-home mom who's tired of everyone thinking sex is taboo. She says she absolutely loves sex and she'll talk about it anytime, anywhere ... and with all of her kids. This includes showing them her sex toys, her sex swing and her X-rated Web site! But that's not all. Margaret is in a relationship with another woman, Jen, and Jen's husband. Now that she's pregnant, both women say they plan on breastfeeding the baby. Then, meet a husband who sometimes uses the F word six times in one sentence! Plus, meet three kids who think their mom dresses too sexy, and follow a woman's quest to change people's behavior in the grocery store, one shopper at a time. Join the discussion.
