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

[nst]

Wait, private citizens can buy police cars? :pink-shock: :? That's news to me. It just seems like a police car in the wrong hands could cause havoc, especially in a small rural area where police are scarce so anyone who looks "official" could play cop.

i swear I saw a copy car in this duggar studio video

[Four is Enough]

:clap:

OK, I'll bite. I was APPALLED to find that Jim Bob and Michelle were not only gone from the house, but gone from the country, while their premature and very "iffy" child, who was still on oxygen and a monitor if I recall correctly, was left at home under the care of young, immature siblings.

I don't care if this trip had been planned and we couldn't get the deposit back. I would not have left the country while my child was still so medically fragile. Nothing is that important.

This was probably the beginning of my questioning the sanity of the Duggars.

I don't know if Jim Bob and Michelle were outside on the porch swing or in Japan; all I know is that they appeared nowhere in the caring for and the talking about Josie's medical issue regarding this seizure. This speaks volumes to me, and I don't like what I'm hearing.

[SassyPants]

OK, I'll bite. I was APPALLED to find that Jim Bob and Michelle were not only gone from the house, but gone from the country, while their premature and very "iffy" child, who was still on oxygen and a monitor if I recall correctly, was left at home under the care of young, immature siblings.

I don't care if this trip had been planned and we couldn't get the deposit back. I would not have left the country while my child was still so medically fragile. Nothing is that important.

This was probably the beginning of my questioning the sanity of the Duggars.

I don't know if Jim Bob and Michelle were outside on the porch swing or in Japan; all I know is that they appeared nowhere in the caring for and the talking about Josie's medical issue regarding this seizure. This speaks volumes to me, and I don't like what I'm hearing.

Thank you for spending the time and expending the energy to write what we all think and thought about the situationS surrounding Josie and her seizure episodeS... and her parents' apparent physical absence and/or selective muteness.

Do 2 wrongs EVER make a right?

[Trynn]

Hope Josie is feeling better and has stopped seizing. Poor kid. How scary!

[colors_outside15]

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 ....

Please note, that I am vague about my job and education (and just about everything else!) as I always strive to maintain anonymity on this website. That being said, I just finished an advanced degree and work with children who have special needs. I think the most important "rule" when talking about people who have impairments, of any sort, is to use person-first language. The purpose of that is to acknowledge that everyone is first, primarily, and at their core a human being with both strengths and weaknesses. In language, this translates to saying something such as, "A young child, who has Autism, and his family ..." rather than "An autistic child and his family". The reason is to emphasize that the "he" in the sentences is a child BEFORE he is Autistic. "He" has more in common with being a child than with every single other person on the ASD spectrum.

That being said, my preferred term, is to say that "a three month old with exceptionalities". The term exceptionalities can be applied both to people who are gifted and to people who have various struggles. It is something that families appreciate and many people in the fields of Early Intervention, Special Education, etc. have begun to use instead of "special needs". That way, conversations can be held, even in public, while dignity for all is maintained as "exceptionalities" does not divulge any information about a person that could be interpreted by the average human as being either "good" or "bad".

Side note: language is important to me. I understand that many others will not agree with my person first language "rule" or decide to use the term exceptionalities and while that's fine, please respect my viewpoint too.

[nst]

Please note, that I am vague about my job and education (and just about everything else!) as I always strive to maintain anonymity on this website. That being said, I just finished an advanced degree and work with children who have special needs. I think the most important "rule" when talking about people who have impairments, of any sort, is to use person-first language. The purpose of that is to acknowledge that everyone is first, primarily, and at their core a human being with both strengths and weaknesses. In language, this translates to saying something such as, "A young child, who has Autism, and his family ..." rather than "An autistic child and his family". The reason is to emphasize that the "he" in the sentences is a child BEFORE he is Autistic. "He" has more in common with being a child than with every single other person on the ASD spectrum.

That being said, my preferred term, is to say that "a three month old with exceptionalities". The term exceptionalities can be applied both to people who are gifted and to people who have various struggles. It is something that families appreciate and many people in the fields of Early Intervention, Special Education, etc. have begun to use instead of "special needs". That way, conversations can be held, even in public, while dignity for all is maintained as "exceptionalities" does not divulge any information about a person that could be interpreted by the average human as being either "good" or "bad".

Side note: language is important to me. I understand that many others will not agree with my person first language "rule" or decide to use the term exceptionalities and while that's fine, please respect my viewpoint too.

you are either Jill Dillard or Hilary Clinton :D

welcome to FJ :D

[fabkiwi06]

I'm 12 years older than my younger sibling. At 24, I believe I was left "in charge" of her for spring break while my parents went out of the state for a conference. Granted, she was much older than 5, there were only the two of us to contend with, and the most exciting thing that happened is that we ran out of toilet paper in the middle of the night. Point being... I don't think it's that unreasonable to ask an adult child to care for a younger sibling for a short period of time.

Does it excuse the Duggars for dumping all their young children on their older ones time and time again while they run around the world? No. Should it be Jana's job to deal with this stuff? Of course not. Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you always SHOULD. Case in point... having 19 children.

[Mama Mia]

These quote streams get so long!

Colors outside the lines -- I completely agree with the person first language.

I really don't understand the extreme resistance to just not using the current terminology some people seem to have. I think if people were talking about terms that were generally considered offensive to a particular race or ethnic group , and someone requested them to use a different word, no one would see that as too sensitive. I think most people would just say something along the lines of " oh, ok, didn't realize that was the wrong term" no big deal.

[RabbitKM]

Side note:

This is completely anecdotal and I only have experience with this because of my family situation. But, is it common for children to get more sick or have these types of medical emergencies when the parents are gone? For example, my sister is currently in remission for leukemia, and it would seem that whenever my parents were planning on going somewhere, she would have a health scare. To the point where it was getting ridiculous and I almost thought she was faking it because she didn't want them to leave (don't judge, sibling relationships under these conditions are very weird). Of course, she wasn't faking it, and I don't think Jose is faking it. But I wonder if there is sone sort of subconscious thing happening in the minds of children when they are "medically fragile" that makes them prone to emergencies when their parents, their nurturers and protectors, are away.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Side note:

This is completely anecdotal and I only have experience with this because of my family situation. But, is it common for children to get more sick or have these types of medical emergencies when the parents are gone? For example, my sister is currently in remission for leukemia, and it would seem that whenever my parents were planning on going somewhere, she would have a health scare. To the point where it was getting ridiculous and I almost thought she was faking it because she didn't want them to leave (don't judge, sibling relationships under these conditions are very weird). Of course, she wasn't faking it, and I don't think Jose is faking it. But I wonder if there is sone sort of subconscious thing happening in the minds of children when they are "medically fragile" that makes them prone to emergencies when their parents, their nurturers and protectors, are away.

Stress can very much affect ones health. Most people don't notice it or have minor illnesses. But it could easily be much worse for some people. Even people who don't have major illnesses or a challenging medical past can be more physiologically affected by stress. One of my friends pukes every time she's stressed. And when she's particularly bad off, she starts puking up blood.

[VelociRapture]

Stress can very much affect ones health. Most people don't notice it or have minor illnesses. But it could easily be much worse for some people. Even people who don't have major illnesses or a challenging medical past can be more physiologically affected by stress. One of my friends pukes every time she's stressed. And when she's particularly bad off, she starts puking up blood.

I was going to mention stress, but you beat me. Lol!

You're right though - stress can really affect people horribly. I have general anxiety as well as social anxiety, so I'm pretty much stressed out 24/7 year round. I'm fortunate that my body has (mostly) adapted to it and that I'm healthy enough to handle it, but there are times when the stress does cause physical symptoms.

I wouldn't be surprised if Josie's reactions could be linked somewhat to stress levels. . . but I don't think it would account for the two seizure episodes entirely. There is probably something else going on that was the main cause of the seizure and stress could have been a smaller contributing factor at work.

[Rescinded and Mended]

Side note:

This is completely anecdotal and I only have experience with this because of my family situation. But, is it common for children to get more sick or have these types of medical emergencies when the parents are gone? For example, my sister is currently in remission for leukemia, and it would seem that whenever my parents were planning on going somewhere, she would have a health scare. To the point where it was getting ridiculous and I almost thought she was faking it because she didn't want them to leave (don't judge, sibling relationships under these conditions are very weird). Of course, she wasn't faking it, and I don't think Jose is faking it. But I wonder if there is sone sort of subconscious thing happening in the minds of children when they are "medically fragile" that makes them prone to emergencies when their parents, their nurturers and protectors, are away.

Congratulations on your sister's current remission, RabbitKM. :)

I think it's entirely possible that this sort of thing could happen. When a child undergoes a serious illness, it does alter the family dynamic. When my own son was going through cancer treatment, he didn't (and still doesn't) have any other siblings in our family, but my husband and I still have a hard time leaving him alone to go somewhere even though he is now well into his teens. And my son does nothing to encourage us to stay with him, either, we just have a hard time leaving him by himself. He had two separate incidents where he nearly died while on treatment, so that's probably where that comes from. Fortunately, he doesn't mind coming along with us on trips, dinner dates, etc. We're close and he likes having us around. At some point, I know we'll have to deal with this and encourage more independence on our part. ;)

But on that note, I could easily see where the dynamic would be reversed and the sick child wouldn't want to be left alone, and might do things to encourage having the parents stay around. Sick children have so little control over the circumstances and pain in their lives, and I can easily understand where the one dependable constant in their lives, the love of their parents, might cause them to do things they normally wouldn't as a way to feel reassured.

[PennySycamore]

colors_outside15,

As the grandmother of a little girl with albinism, thanks so much for your explanation.

[Mama Mia]

Side note:

This is completely anecdotal and I only have experience with this because of my family situation. But, is it common for children to get more sick or have these types of medical emergencies when the parents are gone? For example, my sister is currently in remission for leukemia, and it would seem that whenever my parents were planning on going somewhere, she would have a health scare. To the point where it was getting ridiculous and I almost thought she was faking it because she didn't want them to leave (don't judge, sibling relationships under these conditions are very weird). Of course, she wasn't faking it, and I don't think Jose is faking it. But I wonder if there is sone sort of subconscious thing happening in the minds of children when they are "medically fragile" that makes them prone to emergencies when their parents, their nurturers and protectors, are away.

I think as others have mentioned, stress of course can play a part in illness. Although in the case of a seizure it would be more along the lines of being stressed meant she was more likely to catch some random virus - and the virus led to the fever that led to the seizure. If that makes sense. But she's barely five ( 4 when that was filmed ) and kids that age get sick all the time anyway.

Plus as people here talk about all the time -- it's not like her parents being gone means she's missing her primary care giver. And even if she's much more attached to her mom and dad then is shown on the show -- she's still in her own home with people she loves and sees every day. It's not like her parents left her with paid strangers :shifty-kitty: .

I think it's more likely the same phenomenon that causes people to think it only rains if you've just washed your car, your in-laws only stop by if your house is trashed and you only run into the-one-that-got-away if you look like something the cat dragged in. You notice things more when they impact other things.

[colors_outside15]

These quote streams get so long!

Colors outside the lines -- I completely agree with the person first language.

I really don't understand the extreme resistance to just not using the current terminology some people seem to have. I think if people were talking about terms that were generally considered offensive to a particular race or ethnic group , and someone requested them to use a different word, no one would see that as too sensitive. I think most people would just say something along the lines of " oh, ok, didn't realize that was the wrong term" no big deal.

Mama Mia, you already know I love you and that you're one of my favorites on FreeJinger (sorry world, everyone has favorites) so I'll just try to be concise and go for it one more time. And, as you know, you don't have to agree! This is all just my opinion and anyone can take it or leave it as they like with no hard feelings on my part (seriously).

I don't consider myself extremely resistant to not using current terminology. However, current terminology is always changing and I have found that the more progressive language you use, the happier and more respected people feel, which changes, for the better, how they interact with you.

On a personal note, I identify with the term "person who has exceptionalities" because, as you know, my upbringing was incredibly less than ideal. If someone were to list all of my "official" DSM diagnoses, I would be mocked and scorned and treated like shit. However, the large majority of those diagnoses stem from the hellish, cultish, abusive childhood I endured. If you look at a diathesis stress model, it makes perfect sense. Yet, I go out of my way to go to pharmacies where I won't be recognized by anyone because I cannot let anyone see how many medications I currently need to live a "normal" life.

The truth is, my life was and is exceptional and so am I in both "good" and "bad" ways. If I were only labeled as a person with special needs, I would be hurt because of all the work I have put into healing. I got out, I found an anti-brainwashing specialist (yes, they exist), and I got an education. (Note: this is why I am always hopeful for the Duggar and Bates children. If I can do it, so can they. I'm not a leghumper - I hate those parents more than words can express, but I do have hope for their children!). I've also gone through years of therapy and schooling! I am a person with flaws and with strengths. I don't think it's right to label me as a person with special needs just because I have some special needs. I would rather be looked at as a WHOLE person, in person first language, and referred to as someone who has exceptionalities. It's an increasingly widely used term and I am comfortable with people referring to me in that way.

Additionally, I view it as a sign of respect. For example, I changed my name when I fled. If someone were to find out my *old* name, I would be HORRIFIED. If I told you my old name and you began calling me that, I would cry and not respond because it's not who I am anymore. I have remained in touch with a couple people --- the people who helped me flee. Almost all of those individuals call me by my "now" name - the one I identify with; however, one person for the life of him/her simply cannot remember what I am now called. In that one case, I simply quickly say, "you used to call me ______" so he/she knows who I am and then remind that person to call me by my name. He/she is usually unable to do that because he/she cannot remember as it's too hard since he/she knew me for too long by another name. As I love that person basically as much as humanely possible, I let it go, but it's only in that ONE case and because I know, without a doubt, that we share a deep bond of respect. Aside from that one person, if anyone were to ever, ever, ever call me by that other name it would be disrespectful and hurtful. Although it is not on that strong of a level, that is similar to how I view "special needs" and official DSM names. I'm more than them just as I am more than who I was.

No one here has to agree or understand with any of that, but it's where I am coming from, which, yup, is not the best place. But then again, I got out :dance:

[Mama Mia]

colors_outside15 --- oh, I was completely agreeing with your first post :) .

I was talking about the posters earlier in the thread who were saying people were too sensitive and too p.c. because others objected to out of date terminology that's now considered a slur.

I really like the whole person first phrasing. Yes, I have to stop and think and remember to use it. I'm sure I forget much of the time. But that's how language changes. It's fluid.

And I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the "person with exceptionalities" terminology! I had never seen it before,but it make SO much sense. I will try to remember to use it. Although I'm sure it will take time and " special needs" will be my fall back phrase until it becomes habit.

I think special needs was coined to be a better term , with less judgement attached. I never really thought about it until your post. But thinking about it now, it does kind of have a negative connotation -- like the person is only about needing extra this, or help with that. Without seeing the whole person. And now I'm picturing the lives of my young adult children who had the special needs label, and I'm thinking of the possible difference in their self- concept going through school, sitting in IEP meetings, being referred to as

" special needs student Mary" - or- " Mary who has exceptionalities" - to me that seems like a subtle, but possibly life-changing difference in level of respect and self-esteem.

So, anyway, thank you very much for bringing this terminology to my attention.

[bluebird]

If labels have to be used I certainly prefer those that shimmer and shine with tact and dignity. Professional domains are aware of and trained to use proper language when speaking of those who have any number of difficulties in life. The general public..not so much. The terms people use that come off as insensitive does not always mean that those individuals lack empathy and compassion. They simply have not been educated to use alternative language (minus the "R" word which is more often than not used as a slam word). JMO but the same amount of sensitivity awareness that is offered in schools, etc. Towards race should be mandatory in regards to disabilities. Attitudes are are changed by how we raise and educate children...beginning at a very young age. BTW, I dislike the acronym ID (Intellectually disabled) And have pretty much refused to use it since it replaced DD(developmentally disabled) a few years back. I like special needs or even better using no one size fits all label at all unless necessary. I think it is best to describe the person in a positive light as an individual no label strings or catch phrases attached.

[YourGodIsNotMine]

If labels have to be used I certainly prefer those that shimmer and shine with tact and dignity. Professional domains are aware of and trained to use proper language when speaking of those who have any number of difficulties in life. The general public..not so much. The terms people use that come off as insensitive does not always mean that those individuals lack empathy and compassion. They simply have not been educated to use alternative language (minus the "R" word which is more often than not used as a slam word). JMO but the same amount of sensitivity awareness that is offered in schools, etc. Towards race should be mandatory in regards to disabilities. Attitudes are are changed by how we raise and educate children...beginning at a very young age. BTW, I dislike the acronym ID (Intellectually disabled) And have pretty much refused to use it since it replaced DD(developmentally disabled) a few years back. I like special needs or even better using no one size fits all label at all unless necessary. I think it is best to describe the person in a positive light as an individual no label strings or catch phrases attached.

Actually, ID replaced MR. DD is a completely different diagnosis.

[bluebird]

Well for all intents and purposes for where I work it did. However, DD did cover a range of other disorders and was the label most commonly used when referring to "MR" for probably 25yrs. MR is used (still) in written fed/state, regulations, some paperwork and psychologicals (however I have seen a trend that is moving away from the use of the MR label in psychs) ,how caseworkers were referred to (Qualified Mental Retardation Professionals vs now Qualified Intellectual Disability Professionals) but as a standard label in residential, vocational, home bound, etc. services MR has been referred to as DD. I have worked with the population for over 40 yrs...maybe there is a regional difference. Language that schools use will sometimes differ. Terminology/catch phrases has changed so many times during the years...there was the short term use of a acronym in between QMRP And QIDP of which I cannot recall at the moment. Perhaps there is a variance from one professional domain to the next, idk.

[SassyPants]

Well for all intents and purposes for where I work it did. However, DD did cover a range of other disorders. MR is used (still) in written fed/state regulations and how caseworkers were referred to (Qualified Mental Retardation Professionals vs now Qualified Intellectual Disability Professionals) but as a standard label in residential, vocational, home bound, etc. services has not been used for years(MR). I have worked with the population for over 40 yrs...maybe there is a regional difference. Language that schools use will sometimes differ. Terminology has changed so many times during the years...there was the short term use of a acronym in between QMRP And QIDP of which I cannot recall at the moment.

The root of the problem, IMO.

[bluebird]

Yes...I agree. Maybe move away from the labels, focus on the person and use dx...instead of MR,DD,ID How about saying Down's Syndrome?

[SassyPants]

Yes...I agree. Maybe move away from the labels, focus on the person and use dx...instead of MR,DD,ID How about saying Down's Syndrome?

It's actually Down Syndrome, not Downs...a very common mistake.

[MatthewDuggar]

Yes...I agree. Maybe move away from the labels, focus on the person and use dx...instead of MR,DD,ID How about saying Down's Syndrome?

I hear "...He/she has "Downs"...." quite often and it seems acceptable.

On the other hand, someone who does not have Down's is where it gets tricky. It seemed like there for a while people found ".. on the autism specturm" to be a blanket catch-all for any other condition. This is just in my non-medical day to day conversations with people. I never quite agreed with that.

[Mama Mia]

The root of the problem, IMO.

But all language is that way. At a greater speed recently, of course, since people from everywhere can communicate.

It can be frustrating as you get older, certainly. Even with common words and phrases. I come across that all the time. Even just shopping for things, the word I have in my head from 30 years ago will barely show up on searches, because the item is now generally called something else.

At dinner recently my 20 something kids were having a conversation about something and I realized that if a time traveler from just a few decades ago were plopped down in the middle of it --it would be completely nonsensical. Even though the words themselves are common English words "Download" " search" " YouTube" "Facebook" " binge watch" "streaming" " app" "web" think how confusing it would be :lol:

[SassyPants]

But all language is that way. At a greater speed recently, of course, since people from everywhere can communicate.

It can be frustrating as you get older, certainly. Even with common words and phrases. I come across that all the time. Even just shopping for things, the word I have in my head from 30 years ago will barely show up on searches, because the item is now generally called something else.

At dinner recently my 20 something kids were having a conversation about something and I realized that if a time traveler from just a few decades ago were plopped down in the middle of it --it would be completely nonsensical. Even though the words themselves are common English words "Download" " search" " YouTube" "Facebook" " binge watch" "streaming" " app" "web" think how confusing it would be :lol:

Unfortunately, when dealing with sensitive, delicate and personal subjects, it goes beyond confusion. It hurts peoples' feelings. IMO, most people want to use the correct verbiage because they do not want to appear uneducated, crass or insensitive. Continually changing the language makes that task very difficult.