Turpins 3: 2 Monsters, 13 Victims (WARNING abuse and torture)

[EmCatlyn]

17 hours ago, Carol said:

I have a different take.  I believe the donations will continue to trickle in or continue in fits and starts, but I don't see the donations having big increases.  This story is two weeks old.  The legs it had and the horror it evoked have been lessened because the state stepped in and began caring for the children.  They are considered "safe" now and while I think the public is still interested in the outcome, I think the initial response to monetarily help this family is largely over. 

You are probably right that there isn’t going to be a lot more money coming in.  I was mainly speculating on the reason there wasn’t more.  It may be that some people would rather donate to an “anti-gay” cause or that some people fundies see the case as a made up story to make homeschooling look bad, but I think another reason is that even people who were truly appalled and wanted to help may not have seen an obvious need for money donations. (It isn’t as if the kids need to pay for lawyers or would not get food and medical care without donations.)

 I think that, initially, a lot of people held back from donating until they saw a need and/or could be sure that the money would go to the kids.  There were cases of untrustworthy “go fund mes” for example.  

And, as you say, once it became clear that the State was taking care of them, the impulse to give money lessened.  I confess that I see no reason to give money to pay for medical or dental bills that would be covered by medicaid or disability funds.

That being said, if there were to be a call for money for a specific purpose to satisfy a need that the state won’t cover, many people might still open their wallets and contribute.   But right now people don’t see the need.

[EmCatlyn]

13 hours ago, imokit said:

Made to order group home may be fine for the adults and older children but it could be detrimental to the toddler.

.....

I agree with all your points about the possible problems of housing them all together, but I am singling out the comment about the toddler because I feel strongly that the toddler should be placed in a good foster-to-adoption home as soon as possible.  

The toddler is the only one of the group that can be pretty sure to have a normal life.  I can see keeping her in foster care with some of her siblings initially, but more for the siblings’ sake than the toddler’s.  The older kids and kidults may need to know that the youngest is safe.  But unless the toddler has a particular bond with one of the older siblings, there is no need to keep her with the others. 

I know perfectly healthy and sane families where a gap of as little as 8 years between the youngest of the “older group” and the “baby” meant that the “baby” just didn’t belong with the others.    She really will be better off with a different family than with her siblings and all their baggage.

I think there should always be some contact between the youngest and the others, but it should be the kind of contact you can have with cousins/extended family, not living in one huge household with complicated dynamics and an emphasis on healing from an abuse the toddler probably will not remember.

 

[Elegant Mess]

An update on fundraising efforts for the family, involving area restaurants:

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/01/27/restaurant-fundraiser-to-add-to-almost-400000-donated-so-far-to-turpin-children/

[EmCatlyn]

12 minutes ago, Elegant Mess said:

An update on fundraising efforts for the family, involving area restaurants:

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/01/27/restaurant-fundraiser-to-add-to-almost-400000-donated-so-far-to-turpin-children/

Thanks for posting this.  I notice it updates the amount of money collected.  At $383,000 and with money from the restaurant fundraiser still to come in, the total may be over $400,000 by this time next week.

Quote

Friday’s $100,000 donation went a fund for the siblings set up by the Corona Chamber Foundation, raising that fund’s total to $170,000. Businesses in that city got involved because the seven adult Turpin siblings were taken to Corona Regional Medical Center after they were rescued Jan. 14.

At least 2,105 contributions totaling about $213,000 by midday Friday had been made to a fund set up Jan. 18 by the Riverside University Health System Foundation. Its hospital was treating the six minor Turpin children.

One thing the article notes is that the kids will have ongoing needs that the money (which will eventually be put together in one trust fund) will help with through the years. 

[Aine]

6 hours ago, Sideways said:

I am not sure how a victim facing his/her abuser provides "closure"... although some victims feel a need to confront the perpetrator.  Asking "why" the abuser committed such heinous acts almost never yields answers, and uually the abuser has no remorse.  

But it sometimes lets you say the things you couldn't when you were being abused. I sometimes wish for the chance to face two of my abusers- the two worst ones (both boyfriends of my mother). But neither has ever been punished. If I knew they were locked up and couldn't get me, there are so many things I would want to say that I never had the power to say as a child. However, a lot of the closure I would get from saying those things would be knowing they were stuck in prison and deprived of their liberty and being punished while I wasn't, the complete opposite to when I was a kid. Whether they had remorse or not wouldn't matter in that situation. Confronting them when they're free when I know they won't be remorseful...that would be hollow and likely take more from me than they have already taken.

[scribble]

9 hours ago, SoGladIWasCofE said:

People in horrifying situations often have to prioritize themselves to survive. People in pain lash out - often at weaker people around them. I'd honestly be shocked if everything was great between all the siblings.

This reminded me of something Primo Levi said in one of his books -- (I've read a few and can't remember which one it was in.)  I'm paraphrasing but Levi basically said you had to be somewhat selfish to survive the hell of the Holocaust -- he said someone who would give up their last crust of bread to someone who needed it more, wouldn't survive as long as someone who hoarded resources for themselves. That realization was something he struggled with after he was liberated from the camps, as he wondered if he could have done more to help others.

Back to the Turpins -- I am very fearful the children will end up with relatives, just based on my experience as a foster parent. Placement with relatives is a big priority for the state and the hurdle for kinship placements doesn't seem to be very high. I hope the media attention in this case helps the kids, who need a clean break of it.

While there definitely should be a liberal number of visits between the kids, I'm not as worried about the older kids being split from the younger (as long as it is considered in view of their mental health.) Usually, kids in their mid-20's are off doing their own thing and they aren't at home with their 2-year-old siblings (unless you're a Duggar or something.) It *might* be healthier for the older kids to get some distance from the younger kids. It depends on how parentified they are, I think.

 

[FiddleDD]

2 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

I know perfectly healthy and sane families where a gap of as little as 8 years between the youngest of the “older group” and the “baby” meant that the “baby” just didn’t belong with the others.    She really will be better off with a different family than with her siblings and all their baggage.

I have to strongly object to this. My siblings were in their mid teens when I was born and we’ve always been extremely close. I’m closer to my siblings than many people I know who were only a year apart. Closeness has much less to do with age than it does the individual family. 

I can understand why you feel the toddler should be adopted out, but I believe that would do more harm to the other 12. Sibling relationships are important, and may very well be more important than most to the Turpins. Lots of people have baggage, it doesn’t mean they should have their “normal” family member adopted out so they don’t get “infected”. 

All that being said, I don’t think they all need to live in one giant house together, unless otherwise stated by the professionals. I just don’t think one child should be singled out and legally separated from the rest unless absolutely necessary. 

[Hane]

Families with spread-out children vary. I am very close to my youngest sister, who is 12 years younger than I am, and so is a friend whose baby sister is 16 years younger than my friend is.  I was surprised to hear other friends and acquaintances say things like, “I hardly knew my brother—he was eight years older than I.”

[Shamrock]

11 hours ago, Mcnapple said:

I was reading that during biblical times, "fasting" meant a person only drank juice, not that they didn't take in any calories at all. Big difference from how people promote fasting today.

 

I wanted to comment on fasting from an Orthodox (Christian, not Jewish) perspective. When we fast, it's generally from meat, dairy, eggs, oil, and wine. Shellfish is permitted and depending on the fast, other seafood is as well. Though there are exceptions for the pregnant/nursing, children, elderly, or health compromised. Of course, God understands if you can't fast for whatever reason.

[Aine]

50 minutes ago, Hane said:

Families with spread-out children vary. I am very close to my youngest sister, who is 12 years younger than I am, and so is a friend whose baby sister is 16 years younger than my friend is.  I was surprised to hear other friends and acquaintances say things like, “I hardly knew my brother—he was eight years older than I.”

I agree with this. I have eight half-siblings from my father and mother and only one is close to my age. My paternal-half-brother who is 2-years-younger and we've always been incredibly close until the last few years when he's been in a relationship with an abusive narcissist. But that's another story. That being said, my largest age gap with a half-sibling is 27 years. The siblings that I am closest to are the ones 10-years younger (half-bro; I basically reared that boy on my own and he's grown into an outstanding young man who I truly enjoy hanging out with) and my half-sister who is 17-years younger who I have just 'got' since I can remember. Honestly, we just get each other. The others besides those three, I love to death and would give anything for- but they feel more like extended family or like responsibilities for me (depends on which parent they're born to) than siblings. My maternal side...every time a new one is born, I wonder if/when I'll have to care for it and things. I love them but I do think that. My paternal side? They're like fun little cousins that I see sometimes even though I do absolutely adore them.

I'm also going to add that I've always had the knowledge that I may need to take custody of my maternal half-siblings at some point and I would move heaven and earth to do so even though people from 'normal' families don't understand why. Two of them have been adopted out of foster care by an amazing family and I have a great relationship with them- the first was put into foster care until I got back to care for him, I met them, he had severe FASD and they have been the best parents he could dream of. They also are about to adopt the baby born last year that they've fostered since NICU. The rest are still somehow with her. Even though I don't have regular contact or even know some of them, for better or for worse, I'd drop and give up a lot of things I've worked for to make sure they were having a good life (if it was in my power). I always said, my siblings won't be passed around foster care until they age out. 

[Carol]

I would love to see some of the "christian" mega churches making large donations.  After all, what could be more Christian?  More pro-life?  More pro-child?  More pro-family?  Oh, wait, maybe they have to buy a new jet or more race horses.

Dream-Fucking-On, Carol.

[FiddleDD]

44 minutes ago, Aine said:

 ven though I don't have regular contact or even know some of them, for better or for worse, I'd drop and give up a lot of things I've worked for to make sure they were having a good life (if it was in my power). I always said, my siblings won't be passed around foster care until they age out. 

I just wanted to say I think that is amazing. I have nieces and nephews closer to my age than my siblings and I loved them like they were my own kids. (The youngest was born when I was 13, I still say I get 12% of the credit for raising him (an argument could be made for 15).) They are all grown now, some with kids of their own, and I would drop everything to help them or their families. Sadly only one of them is close with the extended family, but I can’t imagine turning away from a child in need. We might have very different backgrounds, but I relate completely how you feel. 

[Aine]

11 minutes ago, FiddleDD said:

I just wanted to say I think that is amazing. I have nieces and nephews closer to my age than my siblings and I loved them like they were my own kids. (The youngest was born when I was 13, I still say I get 12% of the credit for raising him (an argument could be made for 15).) They are all grown now, some with kids of their own, and I would drop everything to help them or their families. Sadly only one of them is close with the extended family, but I can’t imagine turning away from a child in need. We might have very different backgrounds, but I relate completely how you feel. 

On my maternal side, I'm pretty much the only responsible adult. I'm the one that aunts, uncles, cousins, my mother etc call when they're in trouble. It's not their fault for the most part- there are many layers of inter-generational trauma and just trauma and the results of being a marginalized racial group in my country all mixing together. It's complex. My feelings towards it are complex. But my paternal side is one that loves and protects its own in a fierce way and I translate that to the other side. I have to protect myself from burn out and giving too much but I don't ever want to be the one that doesn't care because despite their many faults to society and even to me, I enjoy being around most of them and they're good people with demons. I have demons too but I got lucky with some stuff along the way that they didn't (my father, paternal grandparents, scholarships to good education etc).

I always remind myself that while I worked hard to get to where I am, I couldn't have done it without people who took on more responsibility for me than they needed to, whether it be extended family or teachers. I'll never say "that's too hard" when it comes to dealing with my siblings- I'll show up and work it out. I thought I'd take my two brothers who were adopted but it turned out they had the best family ever ready for them who love me too. I did take custody of my cousin's kids for 3 years. My life isn't just about me...I can work towards my goals even if it's slowly. I just never want to look back in regret for not doing what I could have done. If I honestly didn't think I was up to helping, I'd step back.

 

[luv2laugh]

9 hours ago, Escadora said:

I think that's a rather passive aggressive comment to make considering that all the posters who were encouraging local donations were trying to do is remind other people that there are children in need everywhere. You didn't exactly come across as believing that your donations would be better accepted locally so we can only assume that you did in fact donate to the Turpin family (unless you didn't donate at all, which is also totally fine - not everyone has money to spare). Especially bearing in mind that people who were trying to direct donations to another place were mostly saying that the Turpins had enough things and to donate their donated items elsewhere. 

What's happened to these children is awful, sure, but what good comes of trying to shame people who are only trying to help someone who might not have a nationwide (heck, even worldwide) exposure to their situation? Unless it makes you feel better or somehow vindicated to try and insinuate that you were right all along? 

idk, cases like this tend to bring out the petty in people. Possibly I'm over-reacting. I just feel like people are doing the best they can with what they have and that unless you're performing or perpetuating abuse, then you shouldn't feel bad for doing what you can to help, even if others expect you to do more/ do differently.

I’m not attempting to shame anyone all, I’m just trying to say that the logic behind it is what is most likely causing a ton people to not financially donate to the Turpins. The logic is similar to the bystander effect in that if there’s a loud scream at night, certainly someone else must’ve heard it and called the cops so there’s no reason to. Psychologically, when we believe there will be many other people stepping up to help someone, we tend not to.

I spent time on here discussing ways to donate care packages, cards, and shared the children’s official fund for financial donations. There was one poster in particular who did not just encourage me to consider locally donating, but stated that giving back to the Turpins would not be “choosing wisely”. I was completely shocked. So, yes, I definitely agree with your last sentence in that I was only doing what I could to try to help, was not perpetuating abuse, and was seemingly shamed for that. Perhaps I misread the tone of the text but it felt like I was being “called out” for not “choosing wisely” by just trying to help.

The silver lining, if there is one at all, in the public learning about this tragic case is that it has shed a light on children suffering all around the world in similar conditions that we haven’t heard about. Hopefully, more people will be giving back to nonprofits helping kids in similar circumstances and speak up if they notice something strange. I know I will try my best to be.

[luv2laugh]

2 hours ago, Carol said:

I would love to see some of the "christian" mega churches making large donations.  After all, what could be more Christian?  More pro-life?  More pro-child?  More pro-family?  Oh, wait, maybe they have to buy a new jet or more race horses.

Dream-Fucking-On, Carol.

I completely agree. Certainly, Joel Osteen can drop another $200k down for these children instead of a luxury vehicle. Places like FRC are always getting a large amount of  money from Christian donors. It just seems like Christians only care about fetuses rather than life after birth.  So many just do not care about improving quality of conditions for the living in need. If all we need is Jesus, then we should be able to live in a pile of poop with joy and not complain a la Lori A. No, I don’t think it’s supposed to work like that... You can have Jesus but if you’re living in a pile of poop, you should still complain- you have a right to ask and receive help and be cared for. In fact, Jesus tells us to serve others in need!!!

[EmCatlyn]

5 hours ago, FiddleDD said:

I have to strongly object to this. My siblings were in their mid teens when I was born and we’ve always been extremely close. I’m closer to my siblings than many people I know who were only a year apart. Closeness has much less to do with age than it does the individual family. 

I can understand why you feel the toddler should be adopted out, but I believe that would do more harm to the other 12. Sibling relationships are important, and may very well be more important than most to the Turpins. Lots of people have baggage, it doesn’t mean they should have their “normal” family member adopted out so they don’t get “infected”. 

All that being said, I don’t think they all need to live in one giant house together, unless otherwise stated by the professionals. I just don’t think one child should be singled out and legally separated from the rest unless absolutely necessary. 

First, let me clarify that I didn’t mean to suggest that ALL families where there is a huge age gap between one group of siblings and “the baby” (or a second group) fail to form bonds and/or attachments between the older and younger.  I know plenty of families where the older siblings are close to the younger ones and vice-versa.

 I was just trying to say that if perfectly normal families, in some cases, have kids separated by more than 8 years somewhat indifferent to and/or unable to connect with each other, there is no reason to assume that the youngest child in this tragically dysfunctional family will gain anything by being raised with siblings who have severe problems caused by long term abuse.

It is not that the older kids will “infect” the toddler but that trying to get the toddler adopted by the same family that would take one or two of the others would limit the toddler’s options and might also reduce the attention she might otherwise get.

Second, I did say that if the older children felt a need to be involved with the toddler, that should be respected.  However, that would be more to meet their needs than the toddler’s.  She is too young to have developed strong “sibling bonds.”  She can still bond with a new caregiver and possible adoptive siblings in a way that the older ones can’t.

Lastly,  none of us know anything about the older children and their individual needs or the best long-term plans for them.  We don’t know how exactly the abuse has affected them (we know they have been damaged but not much more) and we don’t know what they will need to heal.  But we do know what a toddler needs. 

I hope that the decisions made for this family can treat each child/kidult as an individual even as some effort is made to respect the wish to stay together expressed by the older children.   

[lilah]

10 hours ago, Aine said:

But it sometimes lets you say the things you couldn't when you were being abused. I sometimes wish for the chance to face two of my abusers- the two worst ones (both boyfriends of my mother). But neither has ever been punished. If I knew they were locked up and couldn't get me, there are so many things I would want to say that I never had the power to say as a child. However, a lot of the closure I would get from saying those things would be knowing they were stuck in prison and deprived of their liberty and being punished while I wasn't, the complete opposite to when I was a kid. Whether they had remorse or not wouldn't matter in that situation. Confronting them when they're free when I know they won't be remorseful...that would be hollow and likely take more from me than they have already taken.

I don't know if you followed the Larry Nassar case (he was a sports medicine doctor who molested hundreds of athletes under the guise that it was a necessary medical treatment). 165 women gave Victim Impact statements about how much he had harmed their lives. Some did so anonymously and others did so by having another person read their statement but it definitely speaks to the fact that confronting ab abuser in a safe setting can be a very powerful thing.

[elliha]

I think donations may go up again around the time of the trial but I don't expect them to keep getting much after that. I think that when people hear about the horrible things they suffered they want to help but since they are not their own family people forget them in between. 

[Terrie]

I've seen cases where families have committed to adopt siblings, only to back out on the older child because they wanted the younger one and were willing to basically "try out" the older child. We don't have enough information to say for sure what the youngest child's needs are, but based on what we do have, they seem to be different from the older children's. So I would worry about a family backing out on the older kids and keeping the youngest if they tried to place them together. 

[quiversR4hunting]

19 hours ago, feministxtian said:

I read somewhere (I wish I could remember where) that the children would be "rotated" through different rooms and be locked up with different siblings, so it was never one steady group that stayed confined together. I'm assuming that by rotating the sibling groups, one group would not form much of a tight bond against the parents. Divide and conquer. 

I think a lot is going to come out during the trial and it's going to be horrifying. I just hope and pray these kids can find some sort of health, mentally, physically and emotionally in the future.

oh, I just had a horrifying thought about the rotating of rooms and beds after reading your post. Spoiler in case someone doesn't want to read it.

Spoiler

If the kids were rotated to different rooms and different groups then they were put in other beds, chairs and what not. Reports are already out that the kids were not always allowed to use the bathroom. The conditions were not sanitary. For example, let's say Kid A was bound to bed A and now Kid A moves to room B. Kid B now gets to have Kid A's bed. My guess is the bed is not cleaned for Kid B. It is horrifying to think of any kid laying in their own waste but if the kids were rotated now the kids are laying in each others waste.

 

[SapphireSlytherin]

@luv2laugh - Your veiled comments are obviously about what I said. Let me give you a little more clarity:

I WASN'T TALKING TO YOU, SPECIFICALLY, AND I WASN'T FUCKING SHAMING YOU (or anyone else). 

Just because I (AND OTHERS) commented on a thread after you (AND OTHERS) talked about sending these people "stuff" doesn't mean the comments were directed to YOU.

It's NOT all about YOU.

[Nikedagain?]

A bit of an overreaction, eh? 

It's only Monday and this ain't the Naugler thread. 

[SapphireSlytherin]

Hardly an overreaction. The poster in question has been making snide/snarky comments since this whole situation began and I'm tired of it. lol

[Anonymousguest]

I think mostly people were being dissuaded from donating material goods and cards or letters that likely would never reach the Turpins. I agree that people are less likely to donate money because they think the kids needs are being met currently. They will need money long term depending on how long they are "in the system".

I have mixed feelings about the baby being adopted out. Studies show that kids do better and have fewer feelings of rejection when adopted by a family member. But practically speaking it seems unlikely the older children can adopt the sibling, and most if not all the older kids are "unadoptable". I think a group home situation is not at all in the baby's best interest. 

I wonder if they will have separate trials for termination of parental rights? And will that occur before the criminal trial. Typically a child can't be adopted until parental rights have been terminated after a period of time where the parents are given a chance to rectify issues. Will they fast track that process? Or will the kids have to wait until after the criminal trial to be adopted? How old is the 12th child? 12 yrs old? Some of the current minors will turn 18 before they go to trial. 

Maybe if they are fast tracked, and maybe because the case is so public there might be more interested parties they can be adopted, but in normal circumstances none of the children besides the baby have a chance. 

 

[luv2laugh]

1 hour ago, SapphireSlytherin said:

Hardly an overreaction. The poster in question has been making snide/snarky comments since this whole situation began and I'm tired of it. lol

@SapphireSlytherin I’m really not sure what you mean. You’ve continued to consistently downvote, “bless your heart”, and fuck you” the majority of my posts, Turpin related or not, constantly ever since I’ve posted here on this case that has touched my heart. 

Prior to my post upthread, I referred to it as “posters that encouraged local donations” and wasn’t secretly referring to you, rather the collective in general. I really think you’re reading into the tone of my text differently. I have not been making secret posts on what you said to me.