Dillards 48: Proselytising Prick Preaching to People

[Bad Wolf]

I was encouraged by those of you who said your parents later apologized for the spankings. We can learn. (Well, maybe not the Dillards.)

[mizandry]

My immediate family went through hellish abuse at the hands of my bio grandfather (who was also abused as a child). CPS was absolutely called, multiple times over the years, but because they couldn't "find" anything, nothing was done, and it would just fuel more molestation and beatings.

My family was scared shitless of telling anyone in fear of CPS coming back, because as far as they were concerned, the system was incompetent and the investigations were way too generous towards their white "Christian" father. So this idea that CPS has things under control and knows everything by virtue of being CPS is a fucking joke to me.

CPS isn't useless, but it's a work in progress. The existence of an investigation does not absolve people of the responsibility to report what they see (or at a bare minimum not discourage other people from reporting the thing while we all speculate about it on forums). It's a complicated choice to make, because there's so much risk attached to it, but choosing to report IS NOT A WRONG CHOICE. Even if you think law enforcement already knows, even if you think this information has been looked into by CPS... REPORT IT unless you have 100% confirmation it's been investigated.

I was discouraged from reporting about a family on here from Idaho, but did it anyways, and the police didn't respond with, "We're already looking into this and you're adding to our workload!" They thanked me and let me know that they put my report on file and were going to look into it -- which, at the very least, will be a small supporting piece to help build a case if another thing happens and police have to get involved again. 

My aforementioned grandfather was investigated for the possible rape and murder of a young woman, and the story I've heard is that the FBI showed up and searched his backyard and found piles of animal bones (he tortured animals for fun) and an 18 year old woman's ID (but no human bones). He also kept a "secret" room covered in locks in every house my family lived in, and nobody was allowed to see or enter those rooms except for him. One of my relatives remembers catching a glimpse of the room and seeing a bed in there. 

This was all going on in the same time frame. For years, if not decades. Was he ever charged with anything? NOPE. Don't ask me why the fuck not, because I don't know and it still angers me. Maybe the fact that he was a white Christian-leaning man who used the Bible to justify his sociopathic tendencies, even after leaving the Worldwide Church of God (which sold paddles at church and encouraged men to beat their families)? He got a really generous read where it was not deserved all things considered and that's the only sense I can make of this period of my family's history. Enforcement of the law is imperfect at best and though I'm sure it's more efficient now than in the late 70s and early 80s, I doubt it has improved much to not warrant a report from an observer.

Child Protective Services are actually not the gatekeeper of who is and is-not abused, it's a flawed system aspiring to catch up to a public health issue, and assuming the police or CPS have these cases under control and know more than the general public do about it is naive as best. Even if they're looking into a home and have information, it's the opposite of helpful to assume there's no need to say something and make sure they actually know about it. Public concern about a case ups the chances for a more thorough investigation. It can put the case further up on their radar and inspire more scrutiny. If you opt out of reporting, that's understandable, but don't make that the standard for everyone else who feels inclined to say something.

[tabitha2]

I assume with all the years the Duggars have been public lots of well meaning people have reported them for whatever reason and we know they are on the radar because of their history but at some point it becomes apparent that no credible evidence has been found.  The courts gave them custody of a minor child as well. 

[grandmadugger]

7 hours ago, Ace3 said:

 I don't know. I may be pretty far off the mark (which is ok!) but my first thought was maybe this was a choice that the Dillard's made. We see Jill going in a different direction with her personal style (nose ring, pants) which is different than how she was raised. Is it possible that they made the decision to not live in a Duggar property so that they could live life the way the want to rather than constantly being under JBs thumb? I can see the Dillard's deciding that they want to do things that don't match up with the family image, so they moved. We know they haven't been ostracized since we've seen pictures of them at the house recently, but they might want to separate who they are from who the Duggars are for their "ministry" ...? Or am I giving them too much credit?

I think that you are giving the Dillard’s way to much credit. 

[nickelodeon]

4 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

The courts gave them custody of a minor child as well. 

I still don't get why the courts gave the Duggars guardianship of their cousin. The kid needed a stable environment; the family that already has 10+ minors to care for, raises its kids on cable TV and People Magazine, and has a history of unreported CSA just seems like..... not that.

[Bethella]

29 minutes ago, nickelodeon said:

I still don't get why the courts gave the Duggars guardianship of their cousin. The kid needed a stable environment; the family that already has 10+ minors to care for, raises its kids on cable TV and People Magazine, and has a history of unreported CSA just seems like..... not that.

I think his mother supported it and they often try to place children with family if it's possible. 

[FundieCentral]

I have an acquaintance who works at CPS, and here’s a quick rundown of what I’ve learned from her over the years: 

1) CPS is way overwhelmed. They get more cases of reported abuse than they could possibly manage, and the opioid crisis has made the situation dramatic in most rural areas. The highest priority are rehousing kids that have lost both parents, but that already takes up a lot of their resources. A lot of things are on the backburner. 

2) keeping kids within the family has the highest priority. Their mantra is stability. If you grow up a fundamentalist Christian, the priority will be to keep a child in that kind of environment (with familiar rules, familiar routines etc). If it’s within the same family, even better. Religious belief alone is not a reason to take kids out of families, no matter how extreme it is. See the Amish. 

3) Primary reasons to take children out of family are persistent abuse, preferably evidenced by police reports and medical evidence (not the internet or neighbors talking), and inadequacy of food/shelter/basic needs. In cases of spanking etc, they’d rather send parents to parenting classes. Most often, drugs and alcohol are the core problem and getting parents into Rehab is CPS’ preferred course of action. 

4) Doing drugs and alcohol isn’t sufficient reason to take a kid out of a family anymore, there are just too many cases. It has to be done in front of the children and/or interfere significantly with parenting. 

So regarding the above: 

1) disciplining with a paddle may be too much for our sensitivities and Scandinavian law, but to my knowledge does not disqualify a family from fostering a child if it’s a loving family with no abuse and no neglect where spanking is very rare and only for measures of discipline, not anger (aka doesn’t rise to the definition of “abuse”). 

2) In CPS’ eyes, Tyler is perfectly well with the Duggars: they have 1) a bed for him 2) food for him 3) toys for him 4) experience parenting 5) siblings of a similar age 6) of the same family and in the same region 7) already familiar with each other and 8) proof of no drugs and alcohol. In CPS eyes, this is likely a dream come true. 

The situation is truly dire in some rural communities. While my acquaintance does not work in Arkansas in particular, I imagine it applies there too. I hope that helps shed some light on how CPS works from my understanding and why Tyler may be with the Duggars.  

[GuineaPigCourtship]

7 hours ago, FundieCentral said:

1) disciplining with a paddle may be too much for our sensitivities and Scandinavian law, but to my knowledge does not disqualify a family from fostering a child if it’s a loving family with no abuse and no neglect where spanking is very rare and only for measures of discipline, not anger (aka doesn’t rise to the definition of “abuse”). 

I'm not sure if it is the same everywhere, but I had a friend whose in-laws did a significant amount of fostering over the years.  They said there was zero tolerance for physical discipline, so at least in CT using a paddle would absolutely disqualify you.  I don't know for sure but I imagine the idea behind it is a lot of these kids are coming from abusive homes and it doesn't help them in the slightest to end up with more abusive treatment in a strange place.  Sadly, I have heard there is a lot of abuse in the foster care system anyway.

I was spanked a few times as a kid (once with a belt multiple times over the course of one afternoon for the same infraction) and I don't resent my parents for it or think it affects me significantly going forward in life, but I have never forgotten it so it's not a cycle I would like to continue with any future children.  I think my parents both suffered from mild anxiety/depression and had difficulty coping with the stresses of kids on top of some really stressful things in life.  My mom has admitted to suicidal thoughts during our childhood and ultimately was on medication for a while during my teenage and young adult years.  When I had uncontrolled problems with depression and anxiety I also struggled with anger management but recognized the cycle and have made a real effort to develop coping mechanisms if I feel myself getting disproportionately angry.

There was one incident where I was spanked (one or two hard swats on the butt) that I still laugh about though.  My parents must have used child locks on the car doors because my brother and I could never open them from the inside.  We used to sit in the back of the car during trips and pull on the door handles because we knew they'd never open.  Once we were driving down the road and we were doing this and my door opened.  My father slammed on the brakes, and my mom jumped out of the car and she was so freaked out she grabbed my brother out (he was sitting behind her) and swatted him, came around and pulled me out and swatted me, and I remember my dad looking at her eyeing him through the window.  He reached up and locked his door.  I had to have been 5 at the time.

[FundieCentral]

@GuineaPigCourtship: 

Yes, I absolutely want to emphasize that this is to my knowledge - I did not read the official policies. 

I should qualify further what i said above: I know some foster families, and while there is no tolerance for abuse, I have not heard of physical punishment that is part of normal parenting is prohibited - so things such as timeouts in child’s room with closed door, pulling child away from things, giving children a light paddle on the hand with your hand if children put hands on dangerous objects etc. While words only parenting may be the ideal case, CPS to my knowledge does not consider above parenting methods abuse. 

What is never permitted is use of hitting, kicking etc. as a form of parenting - the “pain yields obedience” method. That is most certainly prohibited and abuse. To the extent that paddling children is hitting (rather than a light, short touch to prohibit a child from putting his hands on a stove top, but actually applying force to inflict pain), it is obviously abuse. 

Sorry if if that was unclear. I want to emphasize that i absolutely do not condone child abuse. 

EDIT: Also a definitional matter, I realize speakers of different languages use different terms differently (I’m not a native English speaker myself). In my language we have verbal punishment (telling the child what they did wrong and the consequence), physical punishment (usually timeout, going to the room, having to be on parents hand, having to stay in buggy etc) and violent (corporal?) punishment (hitting, kicking, screaming, hurting the child in some way.) 

 

[Georgiana]

My family fostered. You are not allowed to use corporal punishment on FOSTER children. Corporal punishment is reserved to parents, and you are NOT a foster child's parent, merely their caretaker. Similarly, you cannot spank children not your own without opening yourself up to a world of liability. 

What you do to your own kids is your business. It's preferred you don't use physical punishment on any of them with a foster in the house for various reasons, but it's not necessarily a deal breaker especially with the massive need for homes. It's absolutely not a concern if you USED to use physical punishment. Research on spanking did not reach the general public awareness until rather recently. MANY to MOST people who began parenting before a certain year would have spanked. They weren't bad parents, just misinformed through no fault of their own. You can't blame people for not knowing better if there was no reasonable way for them to know better. If they saw the research and reformed, that's really all they could do.

[VineHeart137]

Derick Dillard: Drunk or nah?

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

7 minutes ago, VineHeart137 said:

Derick Dillard: Drunk or nah?

If It were anyone other than Derick I would laugh at the nerdy math joke.

[TheMustardCardigan]

I took a couple family law classes in law school and the professor would often present us with tough situations and ask the class whether a child should be taken from their parents if they did XYZ unethical, neglectful, or strange thing (we once spent a good while talking about parents who heavily encouraged/pushed their kids into medically unnecessary plastic surgery, for example). At the end of the day, though, his mantra was "Foster care sucks." The state is often reluctant to take a kid away from its parents in a lot of weird gray area situations and, as another poster said, based on what I learned in my classes and while studying for the bar exam, eventually reuniting with the parents if possible or having the child be with blood relatives is a big priority.

[MakeItSo]

just saw the dullard's congrats-on-the-baby-human announcement for Jinger. As someone who has gone through intensive orthodontic treatment and had braces twice, the dude's process is moving slowly, man...his midline is still way off. I understand they were in dangeruss Cinntrill America for a while, but he did go back to AR quite often (which is when I presumed he would have had adjustments and so his treatment shouldn't have been that impacted). It's just odd that it's taking so long with very little visible improvement. I wonder if something went wrong with his jaw surgery back when he had that done. I'm not an orthodontist, just fascinated with the whole straightening teeth and aligning jaw process. 

This is not meant as snark at all. Just an observation and I'm sure I'm not the first one to say this and if it's been discussed to no end, just disregard this post  

[Dandruff]

I still wonder at the reason for Derick's surgery.  Medical?  Cosmetic?  Wouldn't it be something if he went through all that to try to enhance his appearance on reality TV?

[MakeItSo]

24 minutes ago, Dandruff said:

I still wonder at the reason for Derick's surgery.  Medical?  Cosmetic?  Wouldn't it be something if he went through all that to try to enhance his appearance on reality TV?

I presumed it was jaw surgery as part of his orthodontic treatment, but I guess they never fully explained this on the show, eh?

[TuringMachine]

13 minutes ago, MakeItSo said:

I presumed it was jaw surgery as part of his orthodontic treatment, but I guess they never fully explained this on the show, eh?

And now they never will.

[SapphireSlytherin]

17 minutes ago, TuringMachine said:

And now they never will.

And now he'll use that as bait for the book he's gonna write.

"Derick:  The Jawbone of an Ass"

[Incognito22]

Did anyone else see the Congrats video with all the couples except Derick and Jill?  I saw that they did their own video.  We’ve seen pictures of Jill at the TTH but have we seen any of Derick there?  I’m just wondering if TLC isn’t the only one he’s pissed off.  I hope he’s not isolating her anymore than she already is in that cult.  

[SapphireSlytherin]

2 minutes ago, Incognito22 said:

Did anyone else see the Congrats video with all the couples except Derick and Jill?  I saw that they did their own video.  We’ve seen pictures of Jill at the TTH but have we seen any of Derick there?  I’m just wondering if TLC isn’t the only one he’s pissed off.  I hope he’s not isolating her anymore than she already is in that cult.  

It's been discussed on the JinJer thread.

Derick was in the birthday video for Jordyn (was it Jordyn's birthday video???), in the "pan" of the room.

[Sky with diamonds]

4 hours ago, SapphireSlytherin said:

And now he'll use that as bait for the book he's gonna write.

"Derick:  The Jawbone of an Ass"

Open mouth, insert foot.

Open Twitter he can't shut up. 

[Fun Undies]

Not really adding anything new here to the discussion, but yes, just wanted to add to the insight of foster care . . . My parents were foster parents for almost ten years, in Texas and in South Carolina.

We adopted my three brothers through the system, and to protect their identities I don't want to give too many details - but suffice it to say, that DHS, did everything they could to keep the children in the family.  My brothers were abused sexually, and physically, and neglected and starved.  Still, the agency tried working with extended family members, but in one case - the grandma wanted to raise the older two boys, but refused to give up her registered sex offender boyfriend (who'd been accused of sexually assaulting her daughter!).

My youngest brothers family were not interested, and I suspect him being mixed had something to do with it.  They also wouldn't guarantee they wouldn't allow the mother access to him - DHS got involved because she showed up at a hospital asking them to take the baby because she wanted to kill herself and was scared she'd kill him, too.  She was an addict, and he was born on drugs and alcohol.

There's simply not enough foster parents to meet demand - That's part of the reason, family is looked into first.  But according to my family&abuse class for my early childhood education certificate, another reason is to keep something familiar for the child.  These children still love their parents, will miss them, and cry for them - they'll want their old home back, their familiar bed, because it's the only thing they know.  So being able to stay with people they know, versus strangers, is (albeit a minimal) comfort.

I also can't speak for all cases, but from my own experiences, DHS will do everything they can NOT to break up families - therapy, parenting classes, 30 day warnings to clean up environments, six month removal to clean up their act, etc.  Yes, mistakes are made, they're only human afer all.  But there has to be pretty much an immediate threat to life for DHS to show up out of nowhere, and say, "we're taking the kids."

[kachuu]

25 minutes ago, Fun Undies said:

Not really adding anything new here to the discussion, but yes, just wanted to add to the insight of foster care . . . My parents were foster parents for almost ten years, in Texas and in South Carolina.

We adopted my three brothers through the system, and to protect their identities I don't want to give too many details - but suffice it to say, that DHS, did everything they could to keep the children in the family.  My brothers were abused sexually, and physically, and neglected and starved.  Still, the agency tried working with extended family members, but in one case - the grandma wanted to raise the older two boys, but refused to give up her registered sex offender boyfriend (who'd been accused of sexually assaulting her daughter!).

My youngest brothers family were not interested, and I suspect him being mixed had something to do with it.  They also wouldn't guarantee they wouldn't allow the mother access to him - DHS got involved because she showed up at a hospital asking them to take the baby because she wanted to kill herself and was scared she'd kill him, too.  She was an addict, and he was born on drugs and alcohol.

There's simply not enough foster parents to meet demand - That's part of the reason, family is looked into first.  But according to my family&abuse class for my early childhood education certificate, another reason is to keep something familiar for the child.  These children still love their parents, will miss them, and cry for them - they'll want their old home back, their familiar bed, because it's the only thing they know.  So being able to stay with people they know, versus strangers, is (albeit a minimal) comfort.

I also can't speak for all cases, but from my own experiences, DHS will do everything they can NOT to break up families - therapy, parenting classes, 30 day warnings to clean up environments, six month removal to clean up their act, etc.  Yes, mistakes are made, they're only human afer all.  But there has to be pretty much an immediate threat to life for DHS to show up out of nowhere, and say, "we're taking the kids."

Thanks for sharing this.

 

My old college roommate worked with child services in GA for a time. She was always overwhelmed with too many cases that she just couldn't handle because there weren't enough people who worked there.

I remember her getting an emergency night call and from what i heard with her responses on the phone (couldn't hear the other side), it sounded like the child was raped.  I remember her getting off the phone and i'm ready to jump into action: Ok, are we taking the kid to the ER, do you need to leave, how do you want me to help you help this kid. And she was like, "no, that's not my job. There's protocol in place and the cops have to remove the kid and that's just not my jurisdiction. I could get in trouble for interfering with protocol." Which I thought was really eye-opening at how they handle cases & situations. She also went on to say that fighting parents will say anything to child services/police to make the child's other parent look bad.

[Fun Undies]

3 hours ago, kachuu said:

Thanks for sharing this.

-snip- . She also went on to say that fighting parents will say anything to child services/police to make the child's other parent look bad.

No problem <3

We actually had a foster child that this happened with!  He was the sweetest, most well adjusted toddler - and was right between my two older brothers in age . . . We would have loved to have adopted him!

He came to us for three months, while "sexual allegations" were being investigated against his father.  It turned out their was a custody issue and the mother accused the father so she would get custody.  

Having witnessed first hand the aftermath of children sexually abused, I can't guarantee nothing happened to him (not all victims act the same, And ALL allegations should be treated seriously), but I can honestly say he didn't *seem* to have any effects from anything.  He was social, engaged, on track developmentally  (and behaved better than my brothers did at the store lol).  

Furthermore, he continued to ask about his father, but not his mother - and looked forward to seeing his father at supervised visits.  Like I said, three months later, with the full blessing of DHS, the father was awarded full custody (Which actually they expedited that one, seeing as most go six months).

We still think of him every now and then, and hope everything worked out in the end for them <3

[justoneoftwo]

Its fascinating to hear how this works from the adult side.  My headship was adopted after being removed and the record/his memories/what his bio sister says just doesn't all fit.  We are trying to figure out what happened to him, but we can't get access to any court records other than the ones his parents have.  Its really unfortunate that he can't find answers, although we think we know much of it.  The real question we don't have any idea on is why they didn't try any of his extended family first?  Did they not want him (but now are super interested)?  Could the family not be trusted?  I suppose we will never know, but that does impact relations moving forward.