Josie had seizure for 15 mins before EMT arrive- People Mag

[Ofglen]

Mentally retarded is not a "bad" word used in this context. In fact, that was the official medical label until very recently.

As an aside, I really don't think "intellectually" disabled is a nicer term.

Neither are kind, and re*arded is a blatant ableist slur, even if you put the word "mentally" in front of it and call it a medical label. Most disabled people take offense to it, which is why it's not being used by the medical community anymore.

On that note, I don't think we should be speculating about the the mental development of a small child at all. It's none of our business, even if her parents are awful people.

[SassyPants]

The seizures (I say seizures because Jana's statement implied that there were at least two otherwise the time frame would have been until she got to the hospital not she seized before they got there and then all the way to the hospital) happened during the day. The film crews were probably already there. it's very unlikely they called the crew out for that specifically and that the crew would have arrived and set up before the EMTs even got there.

As for where Michelle and JB were, they could have been anywhere. They might have even been there. Just cause Jana has the talking head doesn't mean that they weren't involved. We haven't even seen the episode yet, let's hold off on passing judgements without evidence.

If they were there, yet Jana is out there giving the TH, just makes them look more pathetic, IMO.

So odd to want a bunch of kids, yet not really interested in raising any of them for the long haul...it really is all about blessings for money, IMO.

[Cheetah]

If they were there, yet Jana is out there giving the TH, just makes them look more pathetic, IMO.

So odd to want a bunch of kids, yet not really interested in raising any of them for the long haul...it really is all about blessings for money, IMO.

Maybe it was when they were in Alaska.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

If they were there, yet Jana is out there giving the TH, just makes them look more pathetic, IMO.

So odd to want a bunch of kids, yet not really interested in raising any of them for the long haul...it really is all about blessings for money, IMO.

Jana is a first responder. She's probably being interviewed for that reason. Just like when she did the talking head during Josie's first seizure.

[Jay9]

I'm no expert or anything, but I have worked as an First Responder and EMT, and have now been an ER/trauma nurse for several years.

It could have easily taken 15 minutes or more for the ambulance to arrive. Rural ambulance services are commonly manned by volunteers, who must stop what they are doing, drive to the ambulance station, get the ambulance, then drive to the scene. Sometimes there are no volunteers available. They are at their jobs, etc. So 911 dispatch has to call out to other services that are farther away and see if they can respond.

For those who mentioned some of the Duggars have first responder training, it is the most basic level of prehospital care. There is little to nothing they can do. But basic level or not, in the case of a seizure, it doesn't matter if you are a first responder or a doctor, there's not much to do outside of a hospital. Basically the only thing to do for seizures in the field, is keep the patient safe, maintain a patent airway, and transport to the hospital. Paramedics can give drugs and do advanced airways if needed, but there is often no paramedic within reasonable distance in very rural areas.

Seizures are not uncommon and most of the time not serious. But the way this story is portrayed, it could be serious. Febrile seizures generally don't happen in 5 year olds, as they do in babies/toddlers. And a seizure that continues for "15 minutes and all the way to the hospital", is serious, IF that's in fact what happened.

Seizures are common in individuals with developmental delays or intellectual disabilities, but just because Josie had a seizure/s does not in any way confirm delays/disabilities, etc. I feel that something that complex should be discussed by experts in her case, not random fans/haters on the internet.

[YourGodIsNotMine]

Neither are kind, and re*arded is a blatant ableist slur, even if you put the word "mentally" in front of it and call it a medical label. Most disabled people take offense to it, which is why it's not being used by the medical community anymore.

On that note, I don't think we should be speculating about the the mental development of a small child at all. It's none of our business, even if her parents are awful people.

I disagree that mentally retarded is a slur when used in this context. It describes a retardation of mental capability. Only very recently has it been replaced by intellectual disability. In addition, as I stated, I work in special education and I am not putting down people with disabilities.

In any case, there is no kind way to describe an impairment that is so severe that it is classified as an intellectual disability. What should we use instead? I'm open to suggestions.

[gustava]

So while I can believe that they will film anything, I still can't believe that they put this clip of Josie laying there motionless on the stretcher with the oxygen mask, on TV. I'm a pediatrician and while I'm sure she was laying so still is since she was coming out of the seizure, that is still frightening. If this was a family I was taking care of I would be seriously questioning their priorities. :( And where the eff was Me-chelle?

Child falls into big hole in stage: grab camera and film. Child gets head stuck in stair railing: grab camera and film.

Stick around for the ride, JMO. :auto-ambulance:

[JenniferJuniper]

I disagree that mentally retarded is a slur when used in this context. It describes a retardation of mental capability. Only very recently has it been replaced by intellectual disability. In addition, as I stated, I work in special education and I am not putting down people with disabilities.

In any case, there is no kind way to describe an impairment that is so severe that it is classified as an intellectual disability. What should we use instead? I'm open to suggestions.

Wait 20 years and "intellectually disabled" will be considered a slur as well.

"Mental retardation" was a perfectly acceptable medical description until after decades of children referring to their little brothers as "Retard", it evolved into something else. And when enough little Johnnys and Billys have said to their little brothers "OMG, you are so intellectually disabled!" for a long enough time, that too will be considered a slur.

It's a wonder the word "gay" hasn't been deemed inappropriate yet.

[LittleOleMe]

Wait 20 years and "intellectually disabled" will be considered a slur as well.

"Mental retardation" was a perfectly acceptable medical description until after decades of children referring to their little brothers as "Retard", it evolved into something else. And when enough little Johnnys and Billys have said to their little brothers "OMG, you are so intellectually disabled!" for a long enough time, that too will be considered a slur.

It's a wonder the word "gay" hasn't been deemed inappropriate yet.

I agree. This whole "don't say the word retarded in medical terms" is ridiculous. Retard and retarded are words that have meanings and are not necessarily slurs. And put an asterisk in place of the T?? Really?? That's a random letter to take out.

Calling someone a retard is cruel, but that doesn't mean the word itself should never be used again. Aside from medical, retard is a musical term. It's also used in all sorts of context to mean exactly what it does mean - slow. Retard is really no worse than idiot or moron, which were also medical terms until the 70s I believe. (Technically anyway)

Although I will say, the word "gay" has been deemed inappropriate. Just like retarded, gay is not synonymous with stupid, even though people use it in that context. When I was in college not too long ago there was a huge "movement" about that. I have noticed that it isn't used nearly as much anymore. I honestly haven't heard "gay" to mean anything other homosexual in a good eight years or so, but that could be due to my circle of friends. Of course gay means happy so how we got to the point where it means homosexual to the point where crazy christians have changed the lyrics to old christmas songs is beyond me.

[HuggleMonster]

Am I the only one who noticed the spooked horse right before they carried Josie away? I think she either fell off the horse or got kicked by it. It is quite common for kids to have seizures after a concussion or traumatic brain injury.

I truly doubt it. They would have mentioned it. The odds are its an ongoing health issue.

[Ofglen]

Wait 20 years and "intellectually disabled" will be considered a slur as well.

"Mental retardation" was a perfectly acceptable medical description until after decades of children referring to their little brothers as "Retard", it evolved into something else. And when enough little Johnnys and Billys have said to their little brothers "OMG, you are so intellectually disabled!" for a long enough time, that too will be considered a slur.

It's a wonder the word "gay" hasn't been deemed inappropriate yet.

That's exactly the thing though- words are deemed by marginalized communities to be slurs when they have a history of violence. Language changes and evolves. Slurs are reclaimed over time (see, for example the process of the word "queer" being reclaimed that is currently in progress), and other words are used violently and then deemed slurs by the community they've targeted. That's how language works. In certain contexts (thought certainly not most or all), even the word gay can be a slur.

Yourgodisnotmine- So, you work with disabled people, does that mean you get to speak over actual disabled activists that take offense to the term? I see too many abled people that claim to work for us (as educators, activists, whatever) that are just silencing our voices. If you want to be helpful, amplify what we're saying instead of speaking over it, or move out of the way. Additionally, as with any other ableist slurs, even if members of the community are disagreeing on it (we aren't), if you have an alternative term that doesn't trigger as many people, even if it's not ideal, why would you continue to use the first term? You're just harming the community you claim to stand for.

[YourGodIsNotMine]

That's exactly the thing though- words are deemed by marginalized communities to be slurs when they have a history of violence. Language changes and evolves. Slurs are reclaimed over time (see, for example the process of the word "queer" being reclaimed that is currently in progress), and other words are used violently and then deemed slurs by the community they've targeted. That's how language works. In certain contexts (thought certainly not most or all), even the word gay can be a slur.

Yourgodisnotmine- So, you work with disabled people, does that mean you get to speak over actual disabled activists that take offense to the term? I see too many abled people that claim to work for us (as educators, activists, whatever) that are just silencing our voices. If you want to be helpful, amplify what we're saying instead of speaking over it, or move out of the way. Additionally, as with any other ableist slurs, even if members of the community are disagreeing on it (we aren't), if you have an alternative term that doesn't trigger as many people, even if it's not ideal, why would you continue to use the first term? You're just harming the community you claim to stand for.

Overreaction about these words does a lot of harm, too. There are so many terms in the interest of being PC that it's hard for the aveerage person to keep up with them. So, yes I may use an older name when speaking with laymen.

Again, I challenge you to come up with a PC, happy, cheerful term for a person who is impaired enough that they might never talk, use the toilet, or have other adaptive skills necessary for the most basic independent life. What is that term? What should we say in IEP or transition meetings? Your child is ....

[YourGodIsNotMine]

Overreaction about these words does a lot of harm, too. There are so many terms in the interest of being PC that it's hard for the aveerage person to keep up with them. So, yes I may use an older name when speaking with laymen.

Again, I challenge you to come up with a PC, happy, cheerful term for a person who is impaired enough that they might never talk, use the toilet, or have other adaptive skills necessary for the most basic independent life. What is that term? What should we say in IEP or transition meetings? Your child is ....

Additionally, I have a disability myself. I won't say what it is here, but I face discrimination and it stings. But I'm a realist and don't insist on specific terminology about myself. I live to the best of my potential and expect the same of my students. I'm damn good at my job and advocate for them when they desperately need it.

[JenniferJuniper]

"Mental retardation" was still used in medicine until recently and still is in some places. So I think its a little earlier to get too righteously indignant over its' use.

I'm old enough to remember studying the definitions of Moron, Imbecile, and Idiot for a high school psychology exam. They were in the process of being replaced by mild retardation, moderate retardation, severe retardation, and profound retardation, but still in our books.

[gustava]

http://www.dsm5.org/documents/intellect ... 0sheet.pdf

Case closed.

[JenniferJuniper]

http://www.dsm5.org/documents/intellectual%20disability%20fact%20sheet.pdf

Case closed.

Yes, but we can't quite yet fault everyone for not getting the memo.

[LittleOleMe]

Yes, but we can't quite yet fault everyone for not getting the memo.

It also says "in the upcoming", meaning it hasn't happened yet, so technically, it's still a current and correct medical term.

[lascuba]

Yeah, context is important, so I do think people should give a bit of a pass when "retardation" is used in a medical context, since it originated as a medical term. But it is also a fact that language evolves for all sorts of reasons and it's all to the good that we evolve with it. The term has been mostly phased out medically across all specialties, anyway; IUGR, for example was intrauterine growth retardation and in recent years retardation has been replaced by restriction, though the two are still sometimes used interchangeably . So really, lay people don't have much business saying it and then claiming "medical accuracy." I'm as annoyed as the next person about a word with a very specific meaning being considered offensive because of the assholes of the world, but there will always be assholes. Might as well try to keep ahead of them.

[Ofglen]

Additionally, I have a disability myself. I won't say what it is here, but I face discrimination and it stings. But I'm a realist and don't insist on specific terminology about myself. I live to the best of my potential and expect the same of my students. I'm damn good at my job and advocate for them when they desperately need it.

I was assuming that you were abled based on this statement, and I apologize for that. "I work in special education and I am not putting down people with disabilities."

W/r/t your "challenge", the two most preferred terminologies being used are "intellectual disability" and "cognitive disability". Especially when writing on the internet, I would challenge you not to use an older, offense term. The terms are fairly self explanatory, but if someone wants a clearer definition, google is one click away, and you using this terminology encourages others to do so as well.

Why would you ask for a happy, cheerful word? Disabilities often aren't happy and cheerful in nature. Do you also want me to find a happy word for chronic pain? Intellectual disability and cognitive disability may not be "happy" and "cheerful", but they're also not slurs.

I don't think I'm overreacting. I think that when a member of a marginalized community stands up for something they believe in, even if it's just a simple language matter such as this, it's automatically deemed "overreacting". I don't believe in staying quiet about micro-aggressions, because they're part of a larger problem.

On the topic above, here's one resource I've been using regularly, probably for at least a year, as a guide to ableism in language. It doesn't cover everything, and it doesn't cover what we've been going back and forth on, but it does specify what language to use when referring to intellectually/cognitively disabled people. http://www.autistichoya.com/p/ableist-w ... avoid.html

I think a lot of people see that there are so many terms, and that it's impossible to know them all, and say, "Well, f*uck it, i just won't try at all." I think that's the wrong approach. Of course you can't keep up with everything, and different people are obviously going to have different opinions, but I think it's important to make a real attempt to use preferred language. Just because you don't insist on specific/"pc" language for yourself doesn't invalidate someone else's request for it.

[LittleOleMe]

Just because you don't insist on specific/"pc" language for yourself doesn't invalidate someone else's request for it.

Did you seriously just say that just bc you find a word offensive, someone else shouldn't use it? :confusion-scratchheadblue:

You're right in that your insistence on not using certain words isn't invalidated because someone else doesn't have the same insistence, but it also doesn't mean the other person has to cater to your insistence either.

[Jana814]

Again money is more important than their kids. Why film something like that

Agree!

[Alexa]

Poor Josie, what a traumatic experience. I don't think her health issues should be filmed, it's too personal and she doesn't have a say.

[Ofglen]

Did you seriously just say that just bc you find a word offensive, someone else shouldn't use it? :confusion-scratchheadblue:

You're right in that your insistence on not using certain words isn't invalidated because someone else doesn't have the same insistence, but it also doesn't mean the other person has to cater to your insistence either.

what?

1)If the larger disabled or other marginalized community finds a word offensive, don't use it. In the interest of being a decent human.

2)If a specific person asks for specific language, respect their wishes, just as you would with names. If someone says they would prefer to be referred to as "X", don't keep referring to them as "Y", just because you like it better. So, for example, person A might say, "I really don't care whether you call me a cr*pple or a person with a mobility disability". Person B might say, "I really take offense to the term cr*pple and when you're referring to my disability, only refer to me as a person with a mobility disability." Person C might say, "I'm reclaiming the term cr*pple and only want to be referred to by that word, when you're referring to my disability." You respect everyone's language preference, just like you do with names and pronouns.

So, for example, I have some friends that specifically identify as cr*ppled, as a way of reclaiming the word, but I would never refer to the larger community, or anyone who hasn't specifically asked me to use that word for them, with that word.

[LittleOleMe]

what?

1)If the larger disabled or other marginalized community finds a word offensive, don't use it. In the interest of being a decent human.

2)If a specific person asks for specific language, respect their wishes, just as you would with names. If someone says they would prefer to be referred to as "X", don't keep referring to them as "Y", just because you like it better. So, for example, person A might say, "I really don't care whether you call me a cr*pple or a person with a mobility disability". Person B might say, "I really take offense to the term cr*pple and when you're referring to my disability, only refer to me as a person with a mobility disability." Person C might say, "I'm reclaiming the term cr*pple and only want to be referred to by that word, when you're referring to my disability." You respect everyone's language preference, just like you do with names and pronouns.

So, for example, I have some friends that specifically identify as cr*ppled, as a way of reclaiming the word, but I would never refer to the larger community, or anyone who hasn't specifically asked me to use that word for them, with that word.

Or how about everyone just respects the fact the everyone is different and has difference preferences. I find many words offensive or annoying but I don't go around and demand people not use those words around me. To expect anyone to change their language based on what someone prefers is absolutely absurd. If person A doesn't like the word cripple (and seriously - write out the words) and person B doesn't give a shit and person C is reclaiming it, then guess what - I'm going to use whatever the fuck I happen to use. I don't use the word cripple anyway but I'm certainly not going to make a point to take it out of my vocabulary simply bc someone doesn't like it. Again, that is absolutely ridiculous. Can I still say deaf? Or is that just hearing impaired now? C'mon. This PC policing is really getting out of hand. Not just here, but everywhere. And I'm quite sick of it. It's getting the same level as the crazy christian who go around screaming about the war on christmas and how they're being oppressed. You may change your vocabulary usage depending on who's standing in front of you, but I'm not. And I'm willing to bet most other people aren't either.

[YourGodIsNotMine]

I was assuming that you were abled based on this statement, and I apologize for that. "I work in special education and I am not putting down people with disabilities."

W/r/t your "challenge", the two most preferred terminologies being used are "intellectual disability" and "cognitive disability". Especially when writing on the internet, I would challenge you not to use an older, offense term. The terms are fairly self explanatory, but if someone wants a clearer definition, google is one click away, and you using this terminology encourages others to do so as well.

Why would you ask for a happy, cheerful word? Disabilities often aren't happy and cheerful in nature. Do you also want me to find a happy word for chronic pain? Intellectual disability and cognitive disability may not be "happy" and "cheerful", but they're also not slurs.

I don't think I'm overreacting. I think that when a member of a marginalized community stands up for something they believe in, even if it's just a simple language matter such as this, it's automatically deemed "overreacting". I don't believe in staying quiet about micro-aggressions, because they're part of a larger problem.

On the topic above, here's one resource I've been using regularly, probably for at least a year, as a guide to ableism in language. It doesn't cover everything, and it doesn't cover what we've been going back and forth on, but it does specify what language to use when referring to intellectually/cognitively disabled people. http://www.autistichoya.com/p/ableist-w ... avoid.html

I think a lot of people see that there are so many terms, and that it's impossible to know them all, and say, "Well, f*uck it, i just won't try at all." I think that's the wrong approach. Of course you can't keep up with everything, and different people are obviously going to have different opinions, but I think it's important to make a real attempt to use preferred language. Just because you don't insist on specific/"pc" language for yourself doesn't invalidate someone else's request for it.

It's OK that you assumed I was abled. I rarely think of myself as disabled, but your post reminded me that I,too, am part of the larger group of people with impairments.

Again, I used the MR term because there may be people here who are unfamiliar with intellectual disability, which I did put into parentheses to show them the current term.

But no matter how we word it, a cognitive disability is devastating. We can call it MR, ID, CD, etc. but a word is really just a word when it comes to the reality and challenges facing these people and their families. We can't give words so much power over us when actions are more important in the the end.