Fundie Lite Wife Having Baby with Husband with Severe TBI

[DGayle]

No one can have absolute proof either way, and anyone hoping to get that out of this discussion is going to be disappointed since we're all just bystanders getting a very narrow glimpse into these people's lives. That particular argument unfortunately can't go anywhere but around in circles.

If he can say yes, then he can say no, and he has said no. If he can't consent, then no one has any right to make him into a parent since he can't consent.

True, we only get a narrow glimpse, but that glimpse is what one of the involved parties has decided to show. It's normal to want to present your own blog in your favor, yet despite this, she's let it slip that on several occasions, Cale has said no. How much else is he fighting against having a baby that we don't know about? We've been given enough to know that he has said no, and we have proof that that has been ignored.

[Mela99]

Where is Cale mentally and intellectually? I really can't find an answer...

[DGayle]

Where is Cale mentally and intellectually? I really can't find an answer...

She hasn't given official terms, but has said his abilities are comparable to a 3-year-old, and has said that caring for him is like caring for a small child, though when he gets angry and violent, it can take two people to control him.

[theologygeek]

Speaking of violence...I am going to paste a pm that I sent someone. I don't want to post the last two sentences here, because I'm not comfortable putting this out on the internet, although it is already on the internet. Anyone is welcome to pm me for the rest, but I was wondering if this has crossed anyone else's mind.

"My sister was over yesterday for dinner. I thought the Cale/baby, etc story would make interesting dinner conversation, so I brought up a blog that I have been reading. After we ate, my sister wanted to read the blog. She read some and said "She was abused before the accident." I asked her why she would think that and my sister went into the speech about how it's always the way. Abusive husband becomes incapacitated, wife actually loves the life she has now because the abuse stopped and husband has to rely on wife to take care of him. They get along better than they ever had before and wife considers the accident her miracle and an answer to her prayers. I did think back to a couple of incidents where an abusive husband got sick or hurt to the point where the wife had to take care of him, and did think it was odd that the woman never seemed happier."

[Ariel]

Speaking of violence...I am going to paste a pm that I sent someone. I don't want to post the last two sentences here, because I'm not comfortable putting this out on the internet, although it is already on the internet. Anyone is welcome to pm me for the rest, but I was wondering if this has crossed anyone else's mind.

"My sister was over yesterday for dinner. I thought the Cale/baby, etc story would make interesting dinner conversation, so I brought up a blog that I have been reading. After we ate, my sister wanted to read the blog. She read some and said "She was abused before the accident." I asked her why she would think that and my sister went into the speech about how it's always the way. Abusive husband becomes incapacitated, wife actually loves the life she has now because the abuse stopped and husband has to rely on wife to take care of him. They get along better than they ever had before and wife considers the accident her miracle and an answer to her prayers. I did think back to a couple of incidents where an abusive husband got sick or hurt to the point where the wife had to take care of him, and did think it was odd that the woman never seemed happier."

That's an interesting idea. It may also be a reaction to him being around daily after being deployed for two years as well. I imagine she was incredibly unhappy that her husband was overseas for such a long time so early into their marriage. All 100% conjecture of course.

[Mama Mia]

If he can say yes, then he can say no, and he has said no. If he can't consent, then no one has any right to make him into a parent since he can't consent.

True, we only get a narrow glimpse, but that glimpse is what one of the involved parties has decided to show. It's normal to want to present your own blog in your favor, yet despite this, she's let it slip that on several occasions, Cale has said no. How much else is he fighting against having a baby that we don't know about? We've been given enough to know that he has said no, and we have proof that that has been ignored.

I am reading through the entire blog, it may take me awhile, but I want to get a broader understanding of what they are saying and experiencing. I will say that in my opinion you really can't take someone sometimes having doubts about parenthood as any sort of proof that they are not consenting to parenthood. Many, many people have serious reservations and alternating feeling before parenthood..not to mention after children arrive. I, personally, would never have a public blog because, to me, it's the equivalent of your bratty younger sister finding your diary and reading aloud every awful thought you've ever had....to the entire world.

I think what really surprises me on FJ is that the opinions on some subjects are more what I would expect from some far-right yahoo discussion board. I know we all have differing opinions on many issues, and that's great, but on three topics, I am consistently taken aback by some of the opinions. The only difference between these threads and similar threads on yahoo or faux, is that those sites will devolve into a bunch of racial slurs, which thankfully doesn't occur here. And I don't think my views are particularly extremist - they seem to be pretty middle-of-the-road compared to my colleagues.

And about being "rude" , to me I think it's pretty damn serious to accuse people of rape and project possible future sexual molestation, and assuming the wife was abused because she is taking care of her husband, horrible accusations.......so, yeah, if my response is rude so be it.

[shedemei]

I am reading through the entire blog, it may take me awhile, but I want to get a broader understanding of what they are saying and experiencing. I will say that in my opinion you really can't take someone sometimes having doubts about parenthood as any sort of proof that they are not consenting to parenthood. Many, many people have serious reservations and alternating feeling before parenthood..not to mention after children arrive. I, personally, would never have a public blog because, to me, it's the equivalent of your bratty younger sister finding your diary and reading aloud every awful thought you've ever had....to the entire world.

I think what really surprises me on FJ is that the opinions on some subjects are more what I would expect from some far-right yahoo discussion board. I know we all have differing opinions on many issues, and that's great, but on three topics, I am consistently taken aback by some of the opinions. The only difference between these threads and similar threads on yahoo or faux, is that those sites will devolve into a bunch of racial slurs, which thankfully doesn't occur here. And I don't think my views are particularly extremist - they seem to be pretty middle-of-the-road compared to my colleagues.

And about being "rude" , to me I think it's pretty damn serious to accuse people of rape and project possible future sexual molestation, and assuming the wife was abused because she is taking care of her husband, horrible accusations.......so, yeah, if my response is rude so be it.

Did you mean to quote my post? I didn't say anything about you, let alone your being rude. Or anything else that you're referencing.

[Mama Mia]

I'm sorry, I was referencing D.Gayles post, which is the comment directly before mine.

[DGayle]

I will say that in my opinion you really can't take someone sometimes having doubts about parenthood as any sort of proof that they are not consenting to parenthood.

There's a difference between saying you have reservations, and saying NO. Cale said NO. If his yes means yes, then his no means no, not, "Well, this is just typical reservations about blah blah."

I think what really surprises me on FJ is that the opinions on some subjects are more what I would expect from some far-right yahoo discussion board.

Far-right groups would be calling for him to be sterilized and tossed into an institution without any SSDI or other government help. What we are concerned about is that a baby was intentionally conceived with a man who not only has severe violence issue that make him very hard, and sometimes impossible, for one person to control (even without TBI, this isn't someone who should be having a child until the violence is firmly under control, yet they're still just "working on it"), but who has said no. You yourself are actually saying that his no doesn't get the benefit of meaning no, and that it can mean something else. You are treading on extremely dangerous ground by saying his no could mean something other than no, that it might really be a reserved yes.

[DGayle]

I'm sorry, I was referencing D.Gayles post, which is the comment directly before mine.

I didn't make the speculation that Kathleen was abused by Cale. Theologygeek posted part of a PM someone sent her, but that wasn't me.

[Mama Mia]

There's a difference between saying you have reservations, and saying NO. Cale said NO. If his yes means yes, then his no means no, not, "Well, this is just typical reservations about blah blah."

Far-right groups would be calling for him to be sterilized and tossed into an institution without any SSDI or other government help. What we are concerned about is that a baby was intentionally conceived with a man who not only has severe violence issue that make him very hard, and sometimes impossible, for one person to control (even without TBI, this isn't someone who should be having a child until the violence is firmly under control, yet they're still just "working on it"), but who has said no. You yourself are actually saying that his no doesn't get the benefit of meaning no, and that it can mean something else. You are treading on extremely dangerous ground by saying his no could mean something other than no, that it might really be a reserved yes.

Many people are concerned about his ability to parent a child. Some people think that with the proper supports it has a decent chance of being doable, if not ideal. Some other people think there is no way that the baby will be unharmed. Many people think he can't consent to parenthood, others think he can.

I am reading the entire blog so I can get some idea of the timing and context of his "no"s to having a child. Some people have been adamant that hhis being described as a child by his wife is a big ick factor, and proves she's a rapist. Along with a ton of other incredibly insulting assumptions about disabled people and sexuality. However when I started reading her blog the first few descriptions of him that I read she was describing him as a man, talking about going on a date with her man, what a strong man he is and so on. If I just relied on what I heard here I would never have the idea that she describes him in anything but childlike terms. So I think I'll do my reading and come to my own opinions.

Earlier in this this thread, many people were talking much more about his ability or willingness to consent to sex at all. And repeatedly calling his wife a rapist. And implying that somehow, even though they think he doesn't like /want sex, that his daughter won't be able to have friends over because he won't be able to control his sexual urges and will likely molest them. That sure as hell all sounds like some Yahoo Answers or Faux News Rabid news issue of the day discussion.

[Curious]

I am reading through the entire blog, it may take me awhile, but I want to get a broader understanding of what they are saying and experiencing. I will say that in my opinion you really can't take someone sometimes having doubts about parenthood as any sort of proof that they are not consenting to parenthood. Many, many people have serious reservations and alternating feeling before parenthood..not to mention after children arrive. I, personally, would never have a public blog because, to me, it's the equivalent of your bratty younger sister finding your diary and reading aloud every awful thought you've ever had....to the entire world.

I think what really surprises me on FJ is that the opinions on some subjects are more what I would expect from some far-right yahoo discussion board. I know we all have differing opinions on many issues, and that's great, but on three topics, I am consistently taken aback by some of the opinions. The only difference between these threads and similar threads on yahoo or faux, is that those sites will devolve into a bunch of racial slurs, which thankfully doesn't occur here. And I don't think my views are particularly extremist - they seem to be pretty middle-of-the-road compared to my colleagues.

And about being "rude" , to me I think it's pretty damn serious to accuse people of rape and project possible future sexual molestation, and assuming the wife was abused because she is taking care of her husband, horrible accusations.......so, yeah, if my response is rude so be it.

(mod hat off)

Once again, I'm going to say that IMO, FJ treats this topic pretty much like any other. Since you mentioned it, I've kind of wondered for several years why you are on FJ since you seem to disagree in the majority of the threads you participate on. It's almost like you wait to see what the majority opinion will be and then decide to take the opposite one. If that's the case and you just dig playing devil's advocate that's cool, but it'd be nice if you'd say that's what you are doing because I'm starting to get the impression that you just enjoy being contrary in a lot of these threads :(

We all have our hot button issues. We all come to the forum with our history and life experiences behind us and that influences us. I, personally, tend to stay out of threads that trip my triggers because I don't mind debate (even hotly contested ones :shock: ), I may or may not like having the last word and I can be like a dog with a bone. Since I know these things about myself and have learned over the years that people don't find those things particularly appealing personality traits, I try to not put myself in situations where I will trigger my need to be right at all costs. I don't always succeed :) Sometimes it's just too tempting not to jump into the fray, but I do try not to keep harping on points over and over once I've said my bit (at least in public. My husband would beg to differ :wink-kitty: )

We are never going to know the full story in this case (or many of the others that we talk about here). We only have what the people we follow have to put out on the internet to go on unless we get an insider that comes and tells us more information. I think in the majority of cases the members on FJ are pretty good about reading that information and making their comments in a thoughtful way. Yes, sometimes things get pretty far out there, but the majority of the time when that happens, people also admit they are riding the ISB, as well.

The case at hand is pretty distasteful, IMO, because there is a baby involved and no matter which side is correct, that baby is going to have a rough life ahead of her, just because of the dynamics that are necessarily involved due to her father's unfortunate injury. Growing up with a sick parent is NEVER fun. It's just not. Even if the baby is never tasked with any parental care (which is unlikely), growing up with a parent that isn't "normal" is a rough road. Yes, it happens to probably millions of kids every day, but that doesn't make it any easier. So regardless of which side is "right" in this situation, there is a baby that is going to grow up having a life that is needlessly harder than it should of had to be and SHE did not ask for that.

In my opinion, the most important factor in this equation is the one that had no say in it and no one (not people here, but the people actually involved in her life) seems to be thinking long term about that and that's sad :(

[latraviata]

Curious:

The case at hand is pretty distasteful, IMO, because there is a baby involved and no matter which side is correct, that baby is going to have a rough life ahead of her, just because of the dynamics that are necessarily involved due to her father's unfortunate injury. Growing up with a sick parent is NEVER fun. It's just not. Even if the baby is never tasked with any parental care (which is unlikely), growing up with a parent that isn't "normal" is a rough road. Yes, it happens to probably millions of kids every day, but that doesn't make it any easier. So regardless of which side is "right" in this situation, there is a baby that is going to grow up having a life that is needlessly harder than it should of had to be and SHE did not ask for that.

Exactly this.

[nelliebelle1197]

I am reading through the entire blog, it may take me awhile, but I want to get a broader understanding of what they are saying and experiencing. I will say that in my opinion you really can't take someone sometimes having doubts about parenthood as any sort of proof that they are not consenting to parenthood. Many, many people have serious reservations and alternating feeling before parenthood..not to mention after children arrive. I, personally, would never have a public blog because, to me, it's the equivalent of your bratty younger sister finding your diary and reading aloud every awful thought you've ever had....to the entire world.

I think what really surprises me on FJ is that the opinions on some subjects are more what I would expect from some far-right yahoo discussion board. I know we all have differing opinions on many issues, and that's great, but on three topics, I am consistently taken aback by some of the opinions. The only difference between these threads and similar threads on yahoo or faux, is that those sites will devolve into a bunch of racial slurs, which thankfully doesn't occur here. And I don't think my views are particularly extremist - they seem to be pretty middle-of-the-road compared to my colleagues.

And about being "rude" , to me I think it's pretty damn serious to accuse people of rape and project possible future sexual molestation, and assuming the wife was abused because she is taking care of her husband, horrible accusations.......so, yeah, if my response is rude so be it.

Then why are you here? 75% of posts one here are speculation and projection to some degree or another, including yours in this thread. Some of the speculation gets way out there, and

I have called people out on it in various threads where I have gotten uncomfortable- and I have been called out for giving certain people a pass who don't deserve one. There is no reason to attack another poster who is doing exactly what you are doing, except she does not agree with your analysis. Someone has cognitive dissonance around here....

[Mela99]

She hasn't given official terms, but has said his abilities are comparable to a 3-year-old, and has said that caring for him is like caring for a small child, though when he gets angry and violent, it can take two people to control him.

So, walk, talk, go to the bathroom, that's more or less where he is?

I can't put myself in her shoes but how could she have sex with someone in that position? Or even want to?

[polecat]

Speaking of violence...I am going to paste a pm that I sent someone. I don't want to post the last two sentences here, because I'm not comfortable putting this out on the internet, although it is already on the internet. Anyone is welcome to pm me for the rest, but I was wondering if this has crossed anyone else's mind.

"My sister was over yesterday for dinner. I thought the Cale/baby, etc story would make interesting dinner conversation, so I brought up a blog that I have been reading. After we ate, my sister wanted to read the blog. She read some and said "She was abused before the accident." I asked her why she would think that and my sister went into the speech about how it's always the way. Abusive husband becomes incapacitated, wife actually loves the life she has now because the abuse stopped and husband has to rely on wife to take care of him. They get along better than they ever had before and wife considers the accident her miracle and an answer to her prayers. I did think back to a couple of incidents where an abusive husband got sick or hurt to the point where the wife had to take care of him, and did think it was odd that the woman never seemed happier."

Like "Diary of a Mad Black Woman"?

idk. Could be, I suppose. I think it could also be a normal response in a naturally nurturing woman whose husband just got back from a long deployment.

[Curious]

Something that I have been wondering about while reading this thread. I thought fundies frowned on military service, but wasn't another one of the people we follow (either Ian or Ben) also injured while being in the service? Do we know why Cale was in the military when that is generally not something that this crowd goes for?

[polecat]

Something that I have been wondering about while reading this thread. I thought fundies frowned on military service, but wasn't another one of the people we follow (either Ian or Ben) also injured while being in the service? Do we know why Cale was in the military when that is generally not something that this crowd goes for?

Not all fundies are created equally. Some fundies are anti-military, but others (ime) are very, very pro-military.

My dad was a career officer in the USAF. Every base we lived on had an IFB church within a few miles and was largely attended by other service members and their families. Some churches even have military outreach programs.

Heck, this site'll even help service members find new churches when they get pcs'd. militaryindependentbaptistchurches.com/site/cs/editorial.asp?page=3

[MrsFoxx]

Speaking of violence...I am going to paste a pm that I sent someone. I don't want to post the last two sentences here, because I'm not comfortable putting this out on the internet, although it is already on the internet. Anyone is welcome to pm me for the rest, but I was wondering if this has crossed anyone else's mind.

"My sister was over yesterday for dinner. I thought the Cale/baby, etc story would make interesting dinner conversation, so I brought up a blog that I have been reading. After we ate, my sister wanted to read the blog. She read some and said "She was abused before the accident." I asked her why she would think that and my sister went into the speech about how it's always the way. Abusive husband becomes incapacitated, wife actually loves the life she has now because the abuse stopped and husband has to rely on wife to take care of him. They get along better than they ever had before and wife considers the accident her miracle and an answer to her prayers. I did think back to a couple of incidents where an abusive husband got sick or hurt to the point where the wife had to take care of him, and did think it was odd that the woman never seemed happier."

Just to play the other side of this - she doesn't have to have been abused in order for this to be a positive thing for her. Deployment changes people really dramatically. It took my brother nearly 3 years to be himself again - sleeping in beds rather than in the closet, sleeping without a weapon under a pillow, able to handle frustration without irrational anger...

It might be a relief to have a Cale more manageable than post deployment Cale even without abuse.

[theologygeek]

So, walk, talk, go to the bathroom, that's more or less where he is?

I can't put myself in her shoes but how could she have sex with someone in that position? Or even want to?

In 2011, Cale didn't even know that he was married. She never said if the memories came back. "It’s hard not having him understand things and not having him realize that we’re married and share a home, but for the most part everything is going ok." I could understand the strong desire to want a baby with him so she has a part of the husband she had. But it would be wrong to have sex with someone who didn't understand marriage, never mind the huge undertaking that a baby entails.

[theologygeek]

Like "Diary of a Mad Black Woman"?

idk. Could be, I suppose. I think it could also be a normal response in a naturally nurturing woman whose husband just got back from a long deployment.

No, not like that. In Diary of a Mad Black Woman, she felt a responsibility to stay with her husband. She also loved another man. I mean women who actually like their married life better after the husband became incapacitated.

[Mama Mia]

(mod hat off)

Once again, I'm going to say that IMO, FJ treats this topic pretty much like any other. Since you mentioned it, I've kind of wondered for several years why you are on FJ since you seem to disagree in the majority of the threads you participate on. It's almost like you wait to see what the majority opinion will be and then decide to take the opposite one. If that's the case and you just dig playing devil's advocate that's cool, but it'd be nice if you'd say that's what you are doing because I'm starting to get the impression that you just enjoy being contrary in a lot of these threads :(

We all have our hot button issues. We all come to the forum with our history and life experiences behind us and that influences us. I, personally, tend to stay out of threads that trip my triggers because I don't mind debate (even hotly contested ones :shock: ), I may or may not like having the last word and I can be like a dog with a bone. Since I know these things about myself and have learned over the years that people don't find those things particularly appealing personality traits, I try to not put myself in situations where I will trigger my need to be right at all costs. I don't always succeed :) Sometimes it's just too tempting not to jump into the fray, but I do try not to keep harping on points over and over once I've said my bit (at least in public. My husband would beg to differ :wink-kitty: )

We are never going to know the full story in this case (or many of the others that we talk about here). We only have what the people we follow have to put out on the internet to go on unless we get an insider that comes and tells us more information. I think in the majority of cases the members on FJ are pretty good about reading that information and making their comments in a thoughtful way. Yes, sometimes things get pretty far out there, but the majority of the time when that happens, people also admit they are riding the ISB, as well.

The case at hand is pretty distasteful, IMO, because there is a baby involved and no matter which side is correct, that baby is going to have a rough life ahead of her, just because of the dynamics that are necessarily involved due to her father's unfortunate injury. Growing up with a sick parent is NEVER fun. It's just not. Even if the baby is never tasked with any parental care (which is unlikely), growing up with a parent that isn't "normal" is a rough road. Yes, it happens to probably millions of kids every day, but that doesn't make it any easier. So regardless of which side is "right" in this situation, there is a baby that is going to grow up having a life that is needlessly harder than it should of had to be and SHE did not ask for that.

In my opinion, the most important factor in this equation is the one that had no say in it and no one (not people here, but the people actually involved in her life) seems to be thinking long term about that and that's sad :(

I don't think I disagree with the majority of threads or issues. I do know I am more likely to engage on a thread where there is some sort of debate, rather than jump on with a " me too, I agree with what you just said", because the threads where there are differing ideas discussed tend to be more interesting to me.

I think my views regarding big issues in child rearing, marriage equality for same sex couples, access to birth control, need for health care/social service supports fall in line with the majority opinion here. My views on abortion are more conservative than most people here, so it doesn't surprise me when I'm a minority opinion on that topic, or that I'll get a lot of heat on that topic if I engage in a debate on it.

It does surprise me that the majority opinion ( or at least the majority of people who post) on topics of disability and socio-economic status and medicine tend to be much, much more conservative than what I would expect given the general tone of the board. I'm not even sure if " conservative" is the right word, but they tend to be far outside what I would think to be the norm among people who generally consider themselves progressive. So yeah, I am surprised and am more likely to engage in debate on those issues. Probably particularly because my entire career was spent working in various aspects of social services, so maybe I expect more consensus on those topics than apparently is the case. I probably also see many things as more of a shade of gray, or not that harmful, and will point that out, I think that likely comes from having a career where you see really, truly horrible things all the time - so my dysfunction bar is probably set a little high.

I think idle speculation is fine, especially if we are speculating on something someone actually said - I think some of the wild speculation based on someone's facial expression or a 10 second clip of toddlers interacting is kind of silly. I do feel that idle speculation that includes accusing people of things like child molestation or rape is OTT and potentially harmful.

I'm here and participate because I find this an interesting place, I like to exchange ideas. I like to have conversations about all the things Miss Manners told you not to discuss in polite company. I find it ironic that if i state an opinion that turns out to not be popular the accusation is that I'm just stirring up shit, but if I ( or anyone ) leaves the conversation someone is sure to say that it was a " flounce" .

Sorry for this disjointed, all about me, rambling response.

[Ex 2x2]

For those wanting a glimpse into Cale's mind, check out his facebook page. (listed under his full name, Caleb.) I just hope that innocent baby will be safe. I have a child with a TBI, and while I'm sure it looks different on each person, I have experienced the loss of temper and control. We decided not to bring another baby into our family b/c we didn't think it would be safe. One issue that makes the rages difficult is the adreneline rush that kicks in, making the person very strong. Obviously, for an already grown strong male, that could be even scarier.

[lilith]

If he's writing his own posts I'm pleasantly surprised. He seems to be functioning on a higher level than Kathleen implies, at least some of the time.

[Boogalou]

If he's writing his own posts I'm pleasantly surprised. He seems to be functioning on a higher level than Kathleen implies, at least some of the time.

I agree. I read through some of the blog and Kathleen wrote about how Caleb read to the baby every night while she was pregnant and then again after she was born. Simple books, but he was still reading. She also wrote that he was reading his own bible in large print for a few minutes at a time. I think that saying he is at the level of a three year old is either old information and he has progressed since then or in certain areas he is functioning at a higher level than three.