The following is meant to share some of the history of the disciplinary philosophy of spanking used by the Advanced Training Institute (ATI) in their orphan ministry. Spanking at the Moscow Training Center (MTC) was used too often for offenses that were only minor and as a cure-all and spirit-breaker.  The lack of a coherent, consistent policy on corporal punishment led to confusion and, in some cases, abuse.  It also contributed to the eventual failure of the orphan ministry in Russia.

Many of those who were involved with the vacillating policies had decisions forced upon them by Mr. Gothard or other authority figures. Even “Directors” in IBLP and ATI circles were not autonomous. A lot of mistakes were made, and, under different circumstances, many of them would probably have acted differently. This is not meant to be an accusatory article, but a cautionary tale.

Beginnings: 1995

When the Moscow orphan program began in 1995, spanking was not allowed. Of the three families that served at that time, one of them chose to “rebel” against the direction of the Institute–they spanked. They had some success with the children, and one of the worst-behaved accepted Christ and became one of the best-behaved. However, during the summer this family was “asked” to leave.

In the autumn of 1995, the first group of orphans returned to the MTC from their summer vacations in America. Most of the families that had agreed to work with the orphans had refused to take them into their homes unless spanking was allowed. After some negotiation, spanking was authorized. The family that was sent home during the summer was invited back.

When the orphan program had stabilized somewhat, student leaders and families both had sole care of children. Student leaders were allowed to spank, though only in the presence of a father. Over the next few months, the number of families increased, and student leaders were no longer needed.

No Spanking: 1996

During the summer of 1996, most of the orphans were in America when it was decreed that spanking was no longer allowed. This probably resulted from an article in a Russian paper detailing the methods of spanking used at the MTC.

During the summer of no-spanking, one of the orphans had a sudden and dramatic decline in behavior. He began “praying” to Satan and tormenting an older, but more sensitive orphan who was with the same family. The family who was keeping them both was highly stressed by the situation.

Yes Spanking: 1996-1998

Beginning with the fall term of 1996, spanking was allowed again.

For the next year the situation was stable, without political controversy. In 1998, when the South Campus opened, spanking was still allowed, but not by student leaders. All spanking was done by one of the three fathers. This was one of the least abused methods, as both the father and leader had to agree that an offense was worthy of punishment before any physical discipline took place.

No Spanking: 2000 and Beyond

In 2000, things once again deteriorated. (This was after I had left the Institute, so I do not have any firsthand knowledge.) From what I have pieced together, spanking was once again forbidden. The children’s behavior crumbled, and the lead orphan father was asked to leave. Some of the children even decided that they should act especially bad, so that the Institute would be forced to bring the lead orphan family back. This family had been the only steady presence in many of the children’s lives.

I am not sure when the orphan ministry finally and decisively crumbled, but from the very beginning it was obvious that the Institute had no clear idea about child discipline, especially as it applied to the orphans, who often had special needs due to prior mistreatment or neglect. The Institute’s policy changed frequently, apparently based on political pressure from either ATI families or the Russian government. Maintaining their ability to minister seemed more important than the fruit from the ministry, and the children suffered because of it.