Bates Family Part 6

[missegeno]

Many people who are not religious have children early in their marriage or close in age. It's pretty normal. There isn't anything wrong with it. When they have 6 kids in 7 years then maybe it's because of their belief system but a young couple with multiple kids is common in our society. Why should it be any different for a Bates or Duggar? As much as I believe in birth control, I also believe in a person's right not to use it. 

My cousin got married, had her first child after barely a year of marriage and ended up with 5 kids in 8 years, granted a set of twins in there. Both she and her husband are well-educated with masters degrees. She is run of the mill Christian, has no extreme views and isn't adverse to birth control. Having a lot of kids happens and doesn't always mean it's a bad thing or the result of some ulterior motive. No one gets to decide when someone else should start a family in a marriage that they are not a part of. If people want kids right off the bat, or having them close together, who cares? It's not a point of shame. 

Agreed! Lots of children or kids close in age is not unique to fundies.

As one extreme example, I have a friend who had her first child in middle school, and raised the child while she completed school (graduated from a proper public high school). After high school, she reunited with the father of her child and they still had a spark. Ever since, the two of them have been popping out babies. They are now married with 7 children and the youngest 6 are all very close in age (given that said friend is only about 25 now).

It's way more kids than I could handle, but their family is incredibly involved and love kids and it seems to work for them. The oldest is not a sister mom. All kids of school age go to real school and are held accountable for their grades. They all have their own friends from school instead of being forced onto their siblings. Nobody in the family is overtly religious, and they are very not fundie. But we hear so much of the "I'm 25 and personally delivered 7 kids with this man here, my husband" from fundies that it's hard to remember that it happens without quiverfull ideology as well.

[elliha]

21 minutes ago, missegeno said:

After watching all of I Didn't Know I Was Pregnant, I warn everyone of that too! You are actually incredibly fertile after pregnancy. Breast feeding does mediate it (though that little time before you start really flowing is prime baby making time), but the sex waiting period after birth is one of the few fundie things that I don't really snark on because it protects mother and baby from another pregnancy too soon (though if it is still too soon is a whole can of worms to open).

How well breastfeeding works is extremely individual. Being involved in breastfeeding support and groups on facebook with other mothers who do extended breastfeeding you can see everything from return to fertility more or less directly after birth to being without a period for 3+ years. Most of these women are committed to baby-directed feedings and never with shorter intervals than 3 hours so they should be infertile for at least 6 months and while most are, it just doesn't seem to work for some women. I went 8.5 months without a period so I was pretty standard.

[missegeno]

Yeah! It's really fascinating how individual it is. My point is just that you can't always rely on breastfeeding as birth control, because you don't know if you'll be a rarity. So many women don't even take a pregnancy test because "I can't be pregnant. I'm still breastfeeding." And then they end up on IDKIWP after a pregnancy without prenatal care. But for most cases, breastfeeding seems to be very effective.

[mango_fandango]

Although she doesn't now, Erika Shupe used to breastfeed- Karen was breastfed for six months. Melanie was born 13 months after Karen, so she was conceived when Karen was four months, and still being breastfed. 

Anyhoo: no method of birth control is 100% reliable. Except abstinence. And that's not really birth control at all since there is no sex. 

[elliha]

1 minute ago, mango_fandango said:

Although she doesn't now, Erika Shupe used to breastfeed- Karen was breastfed for six months. Melanie was born 13 months after Karen, so she was conceived when Karen was four months, and still being breastfed. 

Anyhoo: no method of birth control is 100% reliable. Except abstinence. And that's not really birth control at all since there is no sex. 

Erika Shupe did scheduling and this almost certainly put her out of the bounds of LAM, breastfeeding as birth control. 

[mango_fandango]

47 minutes ago, elliha said:

Erika Shupe did scheduling and this almost certainly put her out of the bounds of LAM, breastfeeding as birth control. 

Off topic: I think she actually had physical problems with it eg mastitis etc. She did also schedule the babies (making them sleep through the night by 3 months, I get every mom wants their baby to sleep through the night but sticking them on a schedule and the post she wrote about it is NOT the way to go).

 

[elliha]

18 minutes ago, mango_fandango said:

Off topic: I think she actually had physical problems with it eg mastitis etc. She did also schedule the babies (making them sleep through the night by 3 months, I get every mom wants their baby to sleep through the night but sticking them on a schedule and the post she wrote about it is NOT the way to go).

 

Yes, she has said that she did. Scheduling might be the reason for it though or it could have worsen the problems. In active mastatis emptying the breast is the most effective relief even if it increases the milk supply. The swelling goes down more easily with frequent feedings. She schedules from the start but less rigidly at the beginning and she allows them to feed at night for a while. As a comparison, while my daughter would sleep longer stretches of time already from a couple of weeks old (5-6 hours) she didn't consistently sleep through the night until about 18 months old. She did sleep through on occasion earlier but not very often. I did no sleep training at all with her. I am not against sleep training if it is done with compassion and the baby is at least 6 months old, preferably 10 months+ nor am I against night weaning but my daughter can give a hint of how long it is still normal to wake up.

[19 cats and counting]

10 hours ago, accountingstar said:

It looks like Lawson has a new sidekick in Trace. He just posted another video of them talking about the NFL playoffs.

 

That's because Nathan is in a New York state of mind.....

[EmainMacha]

11 hours ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

Can I just say I have no idea what your opinions on anything are because I get obsessed with both your name and your avatar every time you post. I am like a bird drawn inextricably to your shiny things.

I am so relieved that I'm not the only one distracted by Screamapillar's name and picture. Please never change @Screamapillar.

[Thorns]

15 hours ago, imokit said:

I don't about in America, but for UK doctors if you take a look at something even on an informal basis, you are establishing a duty of care and are thus bound by good medical practise.  Thus you can be in trouble with liscensing for doing something stupid, or not doing something your supposed to.  If you don't have a duty of care, you can't be in trouble.  But any advice or care automatically establishes it even if informal.

Eg - you (a doctor) see someone collapse in front of you in public.  You carry on by.  Someone later finds out that you went past and did nothing and complains.  Morally, you have issues.  Medico-legally - you're fine.  You had no duty of care to that random person.

Alternatively;

you (a doctor) see someone collapse in front of you in public.  You stop and say you're a doctor.  You start helping.  It takes a while for ambulance to arrive, and you have somewhere you need to be, your also tired from the chest compression, you leave.  Morally, you have issues, like the other example.  Medico-legally - you're screwed.  By stopping you established a duty of care and leaving at that point is negligent.

 

My point is that depending on the licencing rules where Chad's Dad is, he could still be bound by them even when not in a formal consultation setting.  He may have still have a duty to report things.

While in Norway, you (a doctor) would be screwed medico-legally if you just walked by. You are obliged by law to stop and offer your assistance to the best of your ability (any licensed health worker has this obligation).

In fact, even as a lay person, if you do nothing, and leave someone in need of medical assistance incapacitated, you are legally responsible and can be prosecuted. You do not neccessarily have to give the  help yourself, but you have to make sure it gets there. 

[DarkAnts]

Nathion at a minimum has a special friend. Callie said that Nathion has a girl friend in one of the talking heads. The two other girls were quick to say that he did not. 

[PennySycamore]

@Thorns, you reminded me of that last Seinfeld episode where Jerry, Elaine, George and Kramer don't help a stranger they pass on the streets in Massachusetts (too much of a hurry to get to Europe, IIRC) and wind up serving time for their lack of compassion.

[Screamapillar]

12 hours ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

Can I just say I have no idea what your opinions on anything are because I get obsessed with both your name and your avatar every time you post. I am like a bird drawn inextricably to your shiny things.

 

41 minutes ago, EmainMacha said:

I am so relieved that I'm not the only one distracted by Screamapillar's name and picture. Please never change @Screamapillar.

Thanks!!! The Screamapillar needs constant reassurance or it will die.

https://simpsonswiki.com/wiki/Screamapillar

[accountingstar]

I finally watched Thursday's episode of BUB. Here are some highlights:

• Gil says the best clean swear word at Beth’s wedding. "Son of America. H-O-T. Lovely."
• No interviews with John or Alyssa in this episode. John was bottle feeding Allie Jane at the wedding.
• Carlin was joking that Tori isn’t getting married until there are 40 nieces and nephews. Tori says that she isn’t waiting that long.
• During an interview, Erin has Carson on his stomach on lying across her knees and she is lightly hitting his back. Is that common for burping?
• Michael really speaks highly of Kelly and calls her the best ever.
• Erin and Tori were playing at Kelly’s sisters wedding. Erin was on the piano and Tori on the violin.
• Beth said Michael could use some of her décor for Michael's wedding. I don't know if she did.
• Kelly is not dressed for a wedding. It appears that she is wearing a shirt that you would buy from REI. It’s an outdoor adventure shirt with pockets near the breasts. At least wear a sundress.
• Lawson will not support an outdoor wedding cause it rains every time. Lawson was under the tree when it started to rain at Beth's wedding. Smart people carried umbrellas during Beth's wedding.
• Nathan has been to weddings without Lawson. He says that it only rains when he is with Lawson at outdoor events.
• Lawson said that the next wedding is probably not going to be him. Not surprised. He is living a good life. Freedom and no wife.
• Someone mentions that Tori likes to hangout with guys.
• Callie spills the beans on Nathan. Ellie tries to cover up by saying no. Little children always spill the beans. It happened with the Duggars when Jill courting Derick. Callie is my favorite Bates.
• It turns out that the Bates cannot set off fireworks at Papa Bill and Mama Jane’s house because Gil burnt down the field as a child setting them off.
• The family is always with Papa Bill and Mama Jane in South Carolina on July 4th. It's a family tradition. Note Alyssa and John were not there.
• Papa Bill is 77.
• Zach and Papa Bill is really close and is the first grandchild.
• Mama Jane has a small house.
• The Bates Family doesn’t have a hammock at their house. Mama Jane just needs to buy them one so hers doesn’t break every year.
• The Bates Family has a tradition of praising each child on their birthday, but they have never praised Papa Bill before. He loves that he didn’t have to pay them to say nice things. Papa Bill's sister says that he is no saint.
• Trace is the king of sports. He got a couple of the little kids out during kick ball and regrets it.
• Mama Jane was like aren’t these my good beach towels.

I wish Mama Jane lived closer so she could be on the show more often.

[Bethella]

22 hours ago, singsingsing said:

My opinion is that we kind of have to assume that all of these couples are staying quiverfull until they say otherwise. So far there's no evidence whatsoever that any of them are trying to prevent or purposely space their children in any way. Michael, Erin and Alyssa all married men whose families are heavily involved in ATI. Zach and Whitney have deviated a tiny little bit from his parents' strict teachings, but as far as I know they've been mum on the subject of family planning aside from repeating the line that children are a blessing from the Lord. We have no reason to think that these couples aren't going to follow in their parents' footsteps.

Schrodinger's Quiver?

[accountingstar]

If anyone is interested in watching Thursday's episode Tumblr told me that you could watch it here:

http://www.watchfree.to/tv-2a2d88-Bringing-Up-Bates-tv-show-online-free-putlocker.html/season-3-episode-1

Note: I have never used this site and not sure about the quality.

[Justme]

I do remember Zach saying he wanted a big family. Wanting and having are two different things. I can see them having between 4-6 kids. I think Zach remembers the "lean" years very well, and being the solo breadwinner, I do see him acting a bit more responsible.

[SassyPants]

20 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

THANK YOU!  I posted a rant on this somewhere ages ago...

Hey, Fundies...that's not a good thing!

Seriously it's like they live in bizzaro world - raising kids (much less several hundred of them) without steady income is a sure source of panic for most rational people...not a point of honor.

And this will be the ultimate tipping point for most of those involved, the money. Sooner or later one of the parties involved realizes that the lifestyle is unsustainable; one or the another decides that grifting for food and essentials is no longer fun.

Isn't that one of the primary reasons that many cults end, lack of money?

[lascuba]

13 hours ago, singsingsing said:

Zach just needs to move to Canada. Police where I live can easily make upwards of 100 grand a year. Of course, he'd need a university degree to stand a chance of getting hired.

I definitely don't see Zach as the crazy doomsday prepper type, but hey, you never know.

I can't speak about Tennessee specifically, but where I live and in large-ish cities in general, cops can easily make that much with overtime and security side gigs, no uni degree required. All the all-night diners, for example, pay cops to essentially hang out in uniform and act as deterrents. I'd say most cops in my area live an upper-middle class lifestyle. 

[elliha]

7 minutes ago, Justme said:

I do remember Zach saying he wanted a big family. Wanting and having are two different things. I can see them having between 4-6 kids. I think Zach remembers the "lean" years very well, and being the solo breadwinner, I do see him acting a bit more responsible.

In the eyes of society 4+ is usually a big family so he might have said so from that perspective. While the children have been sheltered they can't possibly not know that the average family is much much smaller than theirs. Even by fundie standards the Bates have tons of kids, that is why they are even famous. 

As I have said before I expect the Bates kids to have large families by regular measures but that few or none of them will have the same high numbers as their parents even if they marry early. One can always claim "secondary infertility" or find a doctor who will attest that it is medically necessary to avoid pregnancy. While the parents might be of the view that one should trust god even when you are facing medical problems I don't think they will give their children too much grief if they choose differently. There are good theological arguments in favor of following medical advice.

[missegeno]

15 hours ago, imokit said: I don't about in America, but for UK doctors if you take a look at something even on an informal basis, you are establishing a duty of care and are thus bound by good medical practise.  Thus you can be in trouble with liscensing for doing something stupid, or not doing something your supposed to.  If you don't have a duty of care, you can't be in trouble.  But any advice or care automatically establishes it even if informal.

Eg - you (a doctor) see someone collapse in front of you in public.  You carry on by.  Someone later finds out that you went past and did nothing and complains.  Morally, you have issues.  Medico-legally - you're fine.  You had no duty of care to that random person.

Alternatively;

you (a doctor) see someone collapse in front of you in public.  You stop and say you're a doctor.  You start helping.  It takes a while for ambulance to arrive, and you have somewhere you need to be, your also tired from the chest compression, you leave.  Morally, you have issues, like the other example.  Medico-legally - you're screwed.  By stopping you established a duty of care and leaving at that point is negligent.

 

My point is that depending on the licencing rules where Chad's Dad is, he could still be bound by them even when not in a formal consultation setting.  He may have still have a duty to report things.

While in Norway, you (a doctor) would be screwed medico-legally if you just walked by. You are obliged by law to stop and offer your assistance to the best of your ability (any licensed health worker has this obligation).

In fact, even as a lay person, if you do nothing, and leave someone in need of medical assistance incapacitated, you are legally responsible and can be prosecuted. You do not neccessarily have to give the  help yourself, but you have to make sure it gets there. 

It depends a lot on state. Even neglecting to use cpr on somebody is a crime if you are cpr certified in all the states where I have held the certification. In most states (afaik) mandatory reporters are mandatory reporters regardless of if they are on duty or not. If a doctor is at a grocery store and sees signs of abuse, they are legally bound to report it.

Looking over the rainn.org TN mandatory reporting requirements for child abuse, I see no indication that requirements wouldn't apply for knowledge gained outside of the professional capacity (which is usually explicit for other states).

I can't link at the moment, but if anyone wants to research this more, rainn has state by state info.

[choralcrusader8613]

I live in TN. As I understand the law, anyone who is older than 18 years old is a mandated reporter of child abuse of any type.