Fundie Lite Wife Having Baby with Husband with Severe TBI

[GiGi_41]

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?

This...

I've been thinking about this a lot. Maybe I just need more ummmm attention then other woman, but I don't see how having sex with someone not fully aware could be gratifying. I realize sex isn't get for yourself, it's for the other person too.

Again...maybe it's just me. I could be unusually difficult.

[DaffyDill]

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.

I also recall seeing somewhere in the blog where he was driving the car (not on the road, and under supervision of some kind) and was considered proficient enough to drive down their street and park in their driveway at least once.

He has a post on his facebook with a photo he took, according to a comment from Kathleen, of baby Nora, and the post title "Our baby girl", followed by a smiley face. Rather more advanced than a three year old it would seem, even though at times he may exhibit childlike qualities.

ETA: clarification....

[OkToBeTakei]

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.

To the bolded. As you should. As have others. The difference is that others opinion may differ to yours this does not necessarily make them right or wrong. They also may come to different conclusions to you, Some people may be trying to process this situation for the first time or through their own experience of something similar or from a completely opposing view. If you constantly try and brow beat and posture that yours is the only 'correct' conclusion you do nothing to educate your audience if that is your intention but more to alienate those who may learn by slinging insulting 'faux' news accusations. Basically.

[adidas]

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.

I can't remember if I posted my thoughts earlier but once again I'm reminded of the movie 50 first dates.

[Curious]

To the bolded. As you should. As have others. The difference is that others opinion may differ to yours this does not necessarily make them right or wrong. They also may come to different conclusions to you, Some people may be trying to process this situation for the first time or through their own experience of something similar or from a completely opposing view. If you constantly try and brow beat and posture that yours is the only 'correct' conclusion you do nothing to educate your audience if that is your intention but more to alienate those who may learn by slinging insulting 'faux' news accusations. Basically.

This is perhaps a more succinct and clearer way of saying what I was trying to say when I said that at this point you seem to be trying to be contrary in most of the threads. It's not the fact that the opinion is not of the majority per se. People here have different opinions all the time. It'd be a pretty boring place if we all agreed. Even on this thread, the people on the "other" side, do not all agree and several people have stopped posting in this thread and no one has said anything about them flouncing to my knowledge.

I think that is pretty much a thing of the past, unless we are talking about fundies who come in here to school us on that we are all doing it wrong for 50 posts in their first couple days as members and then suddenly take their balls and go home when the kitchen gets a little too hot. Personally, I'm not a fan of that kind of thing (the flounce stuff) when it's been a few hours. I realize people have to eat, sleep, possible work and may not spend 24/7 online like I do ;) If a fundie blows in to tell us how wrong we are and is gone for a few days, sure then they may have flounced, but less than 24-36 hours? Probably they have more things on their plate (and if they have a bunch of kids, I certainly hope they have been things to do than be on an online forum fighting with a bunch of internet strangers during all their "free" time).

I don't think anyone needs to have left this (or any) thread, btw. That wasn't my intent when I posted and I hope that the people that left realize that, if my post had anything to do with it.

[Curious]

I can't remember if I posted my thoughts earlier but once again I'm reminded of the movie 50 first dates.

In 50 First Dates (I love that movie) though, she lost short term memory and was "reset" every day to the day she had her accident. She lost no cognitive ability.

Even that movie brought up some real questions for me. I can't imagine how she would have felt (assuming she was a real person) to initially wake up every morning as her pregnancy progressed, to find out she is suddenly hugely pregnant. What happened if she went into labor after she had been asleep? Her family being on board with the whole relationship helped because she recognized them, but the logistics of a relationship with that kind of injury involved would be MASSIVE in real life.

[RosyDaisy]

No way would I ever have sex with my fiancée if he had a TBI or illness that left him permanently mentally impaired. That falls under "unable to give consent". That's a line I won't cross. I will stay with him and still love him, but I won't cross that line. It's just plain wrong. I also wouldn't have affairs. There is a hell of a lot more to a marriage than just sex and making babies. At least that's what I've learned from elder women in my family.

[Ariel]

No way would I ever have sex with my fiancée if he had a TBI or illness that left him permanently mentally impaired. That falls under "unable to give consent". That's a line I won't cross. I will stay with him and still love him, but I won't cross that line. It's just plain wrong. I also wouldn't have affairs. There is a hell of a lot more to a marriage than just sex and making babies. At least that's what I've learned from elder women in my family.

This is such a complex and traumatic situation that I don't really think any of us can truly say what we would do under the circumstances.

Cale very likely will live for another 40+ years. Is it really fair to expect his wife to be denied physical intimacy for that period of time? I don't necessarily agree with the way she went about it, but I don't fault her for wanting romance, sex, and children.

[RosyDaisy]

Is it right to have sex with someone who has the mind of a child?

[church_of_dog]

Is it right to have sex with someone who has the mind of a child?

I think it's been established that he doesn't have the mind of a child, that was a characterization, and perhaps a poor one, based on specific cognitive abilities and not an overview of his whole personality -- he's an adult man with the history and hormones of an adult man, but who, in some specific applications, is limited to perhaps child-level abilities.

If someone had a back injury and could only lift five pounds, would we say they are "like a child" because that's how much a child can lift? It might be technically accurate in a very specific context but it appears that it was presented here in an inappropriate way and has been addressed earlier in the thread.

It seems to me that the consent issue is of about the same importance as the issue of how a cognitively disabled person can continue to have a healthy sexuality as befits their preferences. So disregarding their sexual desires on the one hand, and continuing on sexually without any consideration to their cognitive changes and their ability to consent on the other hand, are both poor responses. The answer has to be somewhere in between, custom to each person's situation. Or so it would seem to me.

[RosyDaisy]

I see your point.

[lipstickgoalie]

I think it's been established that he doesn't have the mind of a child, that was a characterization, and perhaps a poor one, based on specific cognitive abilities and not an overview of his whole personality -- he's an adult man with the history and hormones of an adult man, but who, in some specific applications, is limited to perhaps child-level abilities.

If someone had a back injury and could only lift five pounds, would we say they are "like a child" because that's how much a child can lift? It might be technically accurate in a very specific context but it appears that it was presented here in an inappropriate way and has been addressed earlier in the thread.

It seems to me that the consent issue is of about the same importance as the issue of how a cognitively disabled person can continue to have a healthy sexuality as befits their preferences. So disregarding their sexual desires on the one hand, and continuing on sexually without any consideration to their cognitive changes and their ability to consent on the other hand, are both poor responses. The answer has to be somewhere in between, custom to each person's situation. Or so it would seem to me.

I don't entirely agree with that statement that Cale doesn't have the mind of a child. Here is why. Firstly Kathleen is the one who says repeatedly that he is like a child. Agree or disagree that is how she views Cale. He is childlike, like a child. He can have a sex life with his wife but what if he decided he no longer wanted to be married to Kathleen? Or a vasectomy? Or that he didn't believe in God? There is no way his opinion or desire in any of those situations would be taken seriously. Kathleen is his legal guardian in the sense that she holds his power of attorney, medical proxy, and while she hasn't commented one way or another on the blog I would bet all of the money in my pockets against all of the money in your pockets that she is his fiduciary for military benefits. He is a legal adult in chronological age but in absolutely no other regard at least in the eyes of the law. Unless things have changed he can't even be left on his own.

Cale's doctors, in addition to numerous other indicators, have stated that his cognitive abilities are that of a 39 month old. I don't understand how that can be anything other than the mind of a child.

I know there are several people who don't agree with my assessment of the situation and point out that Kale and Kathleen are surrounded by mandated reporters etc. but Kathleen never stopped talking about having a baby. Never. Even if every single doctor, social worker, and therapist they came across said that it is a bad idea for her to have a baby with Cale do you really think that would have changed her opinion even a little bit? And even if they all said that it was a bad idea there is nothing they could do about it once she was pregnant. Until something bad happens anyway. She was pregnant around a month after Cale was hospitalized for an extended period of time for very aggressive behavior which continued even after he arrived home.

I read the entire blog and there was only one reference that I found from a professional recommending a baby and it was an occupational therapist who said that it might be a good idea to have a baby because it would "give Cale a reason to live". That advice seems so shitty to me. A baby shouldn't have a job. It seems unprofessional to me.

[nelliebelle1197]

I don't entirely agree with that statement that Cale doesn't have the mind of a child. Here is why. Firstly Kathleen is the one who says repeatedly that he is like a child. Agree or disagree that is how she views Cale. He is childlike, like a child. He can have a sex life with his wife but what if he decided he no longer wanted to be married to Kathleen? Or a vasectomy? Or that he didn't believe in God? There is no way his opinion or desire in any of those situations would be taken seriously. Kathleen is his legal guardian in the sense that she holds his power of attorney, medical proxy, and while she hasn't commented one way or another on the blog I would bet all of the money in my pockets against all of the money in your pockets that she is his fiduciary for military benefits. He is a legal adult in chronological age but in absolutely no other regard at least in the eyes of the law. Unless things have changed he can't even be left on his own.

Cale's doctors, in addition to numerous other indicators, have stated that his cognitive abilities are that of a 39 month old. I don't understand how that can be anything other than the mind of a child.

I know there are several people who don't agree with my assessment of the situation and point out that Kale and Kathleen are surrounded by mandated reporters etc. but Kathleen never stopped talking about having a baby. Never. Even if every single doctor, social worker, and therapist they came across said that it is a bad idea for her to have a baby with Cale do you really think that would have changed her opinion even a little bit? And even if they all said that it was a bad idea there is nothing they could do about it once she was pregnant. Until something bad happens anyway. She was pregnant around a month after Cale was hospitalized for an extended period of time for very aggressive behavior which continued even after he arrived home.

I read the entire blog and there was only one reference that I found from a professional recommending a baby and it was an occupational therapist who said that it might be a good idea to have a baby because it would "give Cale a reason to live". That advice seems so shitty to me. A baby shouldn't have a job. It seems unprofessional to me.

See, I think "mind of a child" is too simplistic. I have a 39 month old. I seriously doubt Cale and she would have much in common. There is a difference between reasoning abilities and all of the other magic that melds together to make us people- Cale has decision making skills similar to my daughter but the rest of him is a grown man with some memories and experience imprints as well as the biology of an adult. Now, I agree with most everything else you posted, but I think this subtle difference is very important.

I have thought about this a lot. I think are huge problems with consent (that does not necessarily equal rape in this case, BTW; consent in this case is much more complex - and much more than sex -than the black and white that posters on all sides of this have made it) but I think the biggest problem is not the consent to sex but the consent to fatherhood. Can Cale's reasoning abilities really allow him to understand fatherhood? Has he been reduced to a biological function - sperm production - rather than an individual with agency? These are hard questions and really interesting to ponder. I don't have an answer. I have FEELINGS but that those are answers to moral and ethical dilemmas this situation raises.

[OkToBeTakei]

One of the standout points on this thread for me despite the polarising views of some is the care in which most posters have taken in addressing Cale as an individual. Addressing his cognitive impairment sensitively. Addressing the minefield that are his rights. The standout point is that the 'mind of a child' title is the one that provokes most response.

Yet it is the person who is charged with his care who is using it. I sincerely hope she uses it as an easy way to connect with her readers rather than as something she believes.

[theologygeek]

I think it's been established that he doesn't have the mind of a child, that was a characterization, and perhaps a poor one, based on specific cognitive abilities and not an overview of his whole personality -- he's an adult man with the history and hormones of an adult man, but who, in some specific applications, is limited to perhaps child-level abilities.

Who established that?

[theologygeek]

I don't entirely agree with that statement that Cale doesn't have the mind of a child. .

I don't agree with it either, and have read nothing on her blog that states anyone has "established" that. He doesn't even understand what marriage is. As for the facebook posts, I think his wife is writing them for him.

[LaLele]

This right here is so true. I evaluate and rehab cognition, memory, language and I absolutely hate when people put an age with an ability level. It is outdated, old school way of diagnostics and just does not do justice to a patient as an individual. Unless there is wide spread consistent damage throughout the cortex (can't even think of what would do this) some areas will be spared and others will be disproportionately in deficit. Calling an adult a mental 3 year old is insulting.

[polecat]

This right here is so true. I evaluate and rehab cognition, memory, language and I absolutely hate when people put an age with an ability level. It is outdated, old school way of diagnostics and just does not do justice to a patient as an individual. Unless there is wide spread consistent damage throughout the cortex (can't even think of what would do this) some areas will be spared and others will be disproportionately in deficit. Calling an adult a mental 3 year old is insulting.

The comments equating Cale with a 3 yo came from no one here but rather directly from his wife, and it is those comments that are triggering such backlash from so many posters here, imo.

I have no idea why she chose to describe him thus (whether for the sake of simplicity or because she really believes it), but it's certainly not surprising that people find it objectionable that she's having sex with someone she claims to consider the same as a toddler. There's seemingly little or no respect there, either for him or for his dignity.

[nelliebelle1197]

The comments equating Cale with a 3 yo came from no one here but rather directly from his wife, and it is those comments that are triggering such backlash from so many posters here, imo.

I have no idea why she chose to describe him thus (whether for the sake of simplicity or because she really believes it), but it's certainly not surprising that people find it objectionable that she's having sex with someone she claims to consider the same as a toddler. There's seemingly little or no respect there, either for him or for his dignity.

Polecat, this is so true. Why does she characterize him that way then turn around and act like he is a capable father? Interesting to ponder.

[Arete]

I don't know where I stand in terms of the consent issues around sex for Cale. It is a very complex issue and I can't seem to nail it down in my own mind, much less form a coherent argument to present to anyone else.

The consent to parenthood is a lot more cut and dry in my mind. He said no. If he is deemed capable of consenting to sex, then he is capable of expressing his wishes about parenthood. It can't be that his yes is yes but his no is meaningless. As to the argument many people change their mind, then he needs the ability to clearly communicate that he remembers his previous no, has given it addition thought, and be able to acknowledge his position has changed . That does not seem to be the case here. It is all about what his wife needs, what she wants, how it affects her.

I know she is a human being with legitimate needs and expectations, but it is unethical for her to attempt to fullfill them using someone who either does not want the same thing or cannot articulate or remember a change in reasoning. She may not have forced sex, but she seems to have forced parenthood.

[OkToBeTakei]

I don't know where I stand in terms of the consent issues around sex for Cale. It is a very complex issue and I can't seem to nail it down in my own mind, much less form a coherent argument to present to anyone else.

The consent to parenthood is a lot more cut and dry in my mind. He said no. If he is deemed capable of consenting to sex, then he is capable of expressing his wishes about parenthood. It can't be that his yes is yes but his no is meaningless. As to the argument many people change their mind, then he needs the ability to clearly communicate that he remembers his previous no, has given it addition thought, and be able to acknowledge his position has changed . That does not seem to be the case here. It is all about what his wife needs, what she wants, how it affects her.

I know she is a human being with legitimate needs and expectations, but it is unethical for her to attempt to fullfill them using someone who either does not want the same thing or cannot articulate or remember a change in reasoning. She may not have forced sex, but she seems to have forced parenthood.

I feel similarly.

As others have done on this thread I am going to add my own experience of cognitive impairment. That is that 'no' really is not that difficult to express. If not by the word itself then by body language. By reaction. By many easily picked up physical or verbal means.

I think 'no' is far more an important right of an individual than 'yes' as 'yes' can easily be led.

It is easy to say that 'no' is not right for an individual if for example they are directly going to be harmed or adversely affected by that decision. I think if you have to decide that for an individual it genuinely calls into question the reasons you have to say when they say 'yes' is also informed. Unless it suits another agenda.

[RosyDaisy]

And if the wife were the one impaired, would anyone feel differently? I know the question was brought up earlier, but I don't recall any answers.

[Elinor]

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

This. In my experience, people in IFB churches are extremely pro-military. I think Calvinists are more likely to be libertarian and/or anti-military.

[DGayle]

See, I think "mind of a child" is too simplistic. I have a 39 month old. I seriously doubt Cale and she would have much in common. There is a difference between reasoning abilities and all of the other magic that melds together to make us people- Cale has decision making skills similar to my daughter but the rest of him is a grown man with some memories and experience imprints as well as the biology of an adult.

Cale and our young children have more in common right now than Cale and our husbands (presuming you're married, and to a man). His decision-making abilities are the big crux here. Could someone with the reasoning abilities of a child so young be capable of deciding to have a baby and understand that all that means?

As for as his memories and experiences, Cale often doesn't remember where he is, or that he's married. He's had pains, but has forgotten where while feeling them. How many of his distant memories do you think he has, and of those he has, how much do you think he can understand them? To be blunt, it would be better for him to not remember most things than to remember the war and not know how to make heads or tails of it all, and not to know how to describe what he's remembering. That is the sort of stuff neutotypical people have a hard enough time being able to handle, even with therapy where they can find the words to express their thoughts, or describe what they see when they close their eyes. How frightening it would be to see this stuff and not know it's what happened, and not know how to say it. It would be like a horror movie you can't turn off.

I have thought about this a lot. I think are huge problems with consent (that does not necessarily equal rape in this case, BTW; consent in this case is much more complex - and much more than sex -than the black and white that posters on all sides of this have made it) but I think the biggest problem is not the consent to sex but the consent to fatherhood. Can Cale's reasoning abilities really allow him to understand fatherhood? Has he been reduced to a biological function - sperm production - rather than an individual with agency? These are hard questions and really interesting to ponder. I don't have an answer. I have FEELINGS but that those are answers to moral and ethical dilemmas this situation raises.

This is pretty much it. He has legal rights that come with simply being 18 or over, but how much can he consent, especially with someone who views him as her child and who he may view as someone in a position of authority who he would blindly trust? He's said no baby on many occasions that Kathleen wrote about, but his no's were ignored.

[DGayle]

And if the wife were the one impaired, would anyone feel differently? I know the question was brought up earlier, but I don't recall any answers.

It was quickly abandoned, I think because it raises the problem about how a TBI's woman's body would be carrying the baby, as if that means Cale should have fewer rights to say no.

I know I wouldn't feel differently, because I already feel Cale has been done a great injustice by his no's being ignored. His consent was not given for making a baby on purpose, and that is wrong. It would be wrong to create a baby on purpose with a woman who said no too, and that would probably bring a media firestorm and debates over consent issues for getting a severely brain-injured woman pregnant on purpose just because she sometimes says yes and the husband really wants a baby. People would say she was demoted to her reproductive organs, but so was Cale.