JinJer and Felicity 42: American Girl (grand)Duggar

[Seculardaisy]

I think Felicity resembles Jeremy quite a bit. I know he used this photo to say he wasn’t a cute baby but I’m sure it was simply an unflattering shot. They have similar features to me.

 

[SassyPants]

In the photos released in the Vuolo’s blog, I can see some resemblance to Izzy and JB Duggar in FV!

[AtlanticTug]

To me Gideon is the most likely candidate for having been born to a mother with fairly out of control gestational diabetes. All the hallmarks are there: typically inappropriate maternal weight gain in the first half of pregnancy (Joy was enormous), large baby, catch-down (ie huge baby turns extremely thin and basically drops in percentiles until they reach they weight they would have been but for the extra sugar), mother fairly rapidly sheds weight post-natally. I am almost at the point of no doubt with that one.

I never want to say a baby isn’t cute but pretty much all other Duggar newborn grandkids were cuter to me as compared to Felicity...also my 6 month old is literally the world’s most beautiful child (I got stopped twice on street on vacation yesterday to be told she looks like Audrey Hepburn) so now I’m a snob lol.

[VeryNikeSeamstress]

I like that most of the baby pics of the Vuolos' website don't have Felicity wearing some big flowery thing on her head.

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

Yeah, I agree with you @AtlanticTug Joy needs to be monitored for GD, Gideon was an enormous baby but now he is a skinny little thing,but he looks very healthy. I wish they would get real medical care and not some 1/2 assed Christian doctor who has shady side business to keep the money rolling in. 

[Mama Mia]

Just to point out, the US has the worst outcomes for both infant and maternal mortality in the developed world - and the vast, vast majority of babies are born in the hospital. 

https://www.thisisinsider.com/us-reportedly-most-dangerous-developed-country-give-birth-2018-7

 

While Jill and Joy both had difficulties, due to large, mal-positioned babies, there is no way of knowing - especially with Joy, if she “went too long” before the breech being discovered. Some baby’s turn in labor. Most providers recommend laboring at home until towards the end. That can be an hour, or a day.

Jessa and Anna have had perfectly fine home births. Jessa had a hemorrhage after the birth, that was appropriately dealt with. 

They obviously should all have trained, experienced mid-wife’s, but that doesn’t mean that everything would be hunky-dory if they chose a hospital. 

[Melissa1977]

6 hours ago, luv2laugh said:

The married Bates daughters are beating the Duggars in terms of pregnancy. I think both Alyssa and Erin had 3 babies in 3 years, am I correct on this?

Which makes Duggarlins lives easier. (Except that Jill has Derick. I'd prefer 10 kids than a Derick). But we don't know how fertility will work with Kendra or Joy, maybe they'll be like Michelle

But there are still a lot of Duggar and Bates girls to marry. Some will have big families, others little ones (naturally or because BC), others will be infertile and maybe some kid will stay single.

[just_ordinary]

5 hours ago, Mama Mia said:

Just to point out, the US has the worst outcomes for both infant and maternal mortality in the developed world - and the vast, vast majority of babies are born in the hospital. 

https://www.thisisinsider.com/us-reportedly-most-dangerous-developed-country-give-birth-2018-7

 

While Jill and Joy both had difficulties, due to large, mal-positioned babies, there is no way of knowing - especially with Joy, if she “went too long” before the breech being discovered. Some baby’s turn in labor. Most providers recommend laboring at home until towards the end. That can be an hour, or a day.

Jessa and Anna have had perfectly fine home births. Jessa had a hemorrhage after the birth, that was appropriately dealt with. 

They obviously should all have trained, experienced mid-wife’s, but that doesn’t mean that everything would be hunky-dory if they chose a hospital. 

The point is not that they choose a homebirth in general. The point is that it seems as if they don’t get good prenatal care and work with fairly incompetent midwives.

Here a midwife only ever does a homebirth when your pregnancy has been perfect. It’s for safety of mother and child and for insurance reasons. So in statistics homebirths look even better than hospital deliveries but that is solely on the criteria you have to meet to even get an attended homebirth.

The midwives attending Jill‘s and Joy‘s birth didn’t do a good job in my opinion. If labour takes too long or isn’t progressing there comes the point to call it off and they shouldn’t be surprised by the babies position. (A baby with its head firmly in the pelvis is very very unlikely to turn in labour. It gets even more unlikely when the baby is huge and the mother has a short torso. It can happen but you would definitely notice and it wouldn’t have to be an emergency c-section). Those midwives failed their patients.

[Mama Mia]

2 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

The point is not that they choose a homebirth in general. The point is that it seems as if they don’t get good prenatal care and work with fairly incompetent midwives.

Here a midwife only ever does a homebirth when your pregnancy has been perfect. It’s for safety of mother and child and for insurance reasons. So in statistics homebirths look even better than hospital deliveries but that is solely on the criteria you have to meet to even get an attended homebirth.

The midwives attending Jill‘s and Joy‘s birth didn’t do a good job in my opinion. If labour takes too long or isn’t progressing there comes the point to call it off and they shouldn’t be surprised by the babies position. (A baby with its head firmly in the pelvis is very very unlikely to turn in labour. It gets even more unlikely when the baby is huge and the mother has a short torso. It can happen but you would definitely notice and it wouldn’t have to be an emergency c-section). Those midwives failed their patients.

Except that is exactly what happened to me, with my first child, at a hospital. Resulting in an emergency c-section. Yes, they definitely should have had experienced, certified midwives - but the assumptions that tend to bemade here about birth, and birth processes, are really far off reality.

[SassyPants]

Did we ever see an episode where Jessa or Joy received prenatal care from anyone other than Jill? Or how about Jill during her pregnancy with Sam? Beside the USs to detect the sex of the babies, when did we ever see those young women getting care at all?

 

[SapphireSlytherin]

I don't recall having seen the sort of activities you've listed, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen. Schroedinger's Prenatal Visits, I guess.

 

Again - we see ONLY what they want us to see.

 

[justoneoftwo]

59 minutes ago, Mama Mia said:

Except that is exactly what happened to me, with my first child, at a hospital. Resulting in an emergency c-section. Yes, they definitely should have had experienced, certified midwives - but the assumptions that tend to bemade here about birth, and birth processes, are really far off reality.

Some assumptions are off, but most are actually based on research and data.  The data can be interpreted multiple ways, but I will say that FJ is a very educated group, particularly on this topic.  

Is it possible that they did everything "right" and just got unlucky?  Sure, although with Jill we know thats not the case.  Its more likely that they chose to work with midwives who wouldn't send them to doctors when they should have.  

[SassyPants]

18 minutes ago, SapphireSlytherin said:

I don't recall having seen the sort of activities you've listed, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen. Schroedinger's Prenatal Visits, I guess.

 

Again - we see ONLY what they want us to see.

 

We did see Michelle receiving various levels of care and prenatal education. Also Anna with her first few pregnancies, and Jill with Izzy...it seems the backlash after Izzy and SES’s births caused a clamp down-

[Mama Mia]

2 hours ago, justoneoftwo said:

Some assumptions are off, but most are actually based on research and data.  The data can be interpreted multiple ways, but I will say that FJ is a very educated group, particularly on this topic.  

Is it possible that they did everything "right" and just got unlucky?  Sure, although with Jill we know thats not the case.  Its more likely that they chose to work with midwives who wouldn't send them to doctors when they should have.  

This is a subject I should probably walk away from. 

Do people do everything “right” and get unlucky ? Yes, all the f*ing time. Hence the 1/3 ish births by c-section in the US. Would either Jill or Joy had a c-section if they had started at the hospital with large, breech 1st baby’s ? Yes, obviously. So how, specifically, did they screw up ? 

[justoneoftwo]

2 minutes ago, Mama Mia said:

This is a subject I should probably walk away from. 

Do people do everything “right” and get unlucky ? Yes, all the f*ing time. Hence the 1/3 ish births by c-section in the US. Would either Jill or Joy had a c-section if they had started at the hospital with large, breech 1st baby’s ? Yes, obviously. So how, specifically, did they screw up ? 

Joy, I don't know if she did.  I'm inclined to think that someone knowing earlier the baby was breach could maybe have resulted in turning the baby, but probably not.  Jill didn't think having meconium was worth being concerned about and refused treatment.  Did that add to the problems?  I don't know, but its hard to argue that wasn't wrong.

[SassyPants]

7 minutes ago, justoneoftwo said:

Joy, I don't know if she did.  I'm inclined to think that someone knowing earlier the baby was breach could maybe have resulted in turning the baby, but probably not.  Jill didn't think having meconium was worth being concerned about and refused treatment.  Did that add to the problems?  I don't know, but its hard to argue that wasn't wrong.

With Jill, the breech presentation was merely the final straw. Long labor, prolonged rupture of membranes, with meconium staining AND a prenatal dx of being Group B Strep positive AND being overdue...a recipe for a disaster that Jill and Derwood basically ignored.

Personally I do not understand how no one knew that these babies were breech prior to active labor. 10 lb babies do not easily flip, especially as labor advances and they start to move towards the birth canal.

[LegHumperBibleThumper]

6 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

 

The midwives attending Jill‘s and Joy‘s birth didn’t do a good job in my opinion. If labour takes too long or isn’t progressing there comes the point to call it off and they shouldn’t be surprised by the babies position. (A baby with its head firmly in the pelvis is very very unlikely to turn in labour. It gets even more unlikely when the baby is huge and the mother has a short torso. It can happen but you would definitely notice and it wouldn’t have to be an emergency c-section). Those midwives failed their patients.

To the bolded: This is exactly how I was born. I was a large baby at 9lb2oz and 22.5in long and my mother was only 5'1". I turned during labor and began to come out feet first before they whisked her off to an emergency C-section. This was in a hospital in 1988. 

[Mama Mia]

1 hour ago, SassyPants said:

With Jill, the breech presentation was merely the final straw. Long labor, prolonged rupture of membranes, with meconium staining AND a prenatal dx of being Group B Strep positive AND being overdue...a recipe for a disaster that Jill and Derwood basically ignored.

Personally I do not understand how no one knew that these babies were breech prior to active labor. 10 lb babies do not easily flip, especially as labor advances and they start to move towards the birth canal.

Yea...my daughter had a leak for a week that her idiot dr insisted was urine. Heavy meconium , fever of 104 and Dr took to next day to do the c-section. She almost died, her baby almost died as well. In the damn hospital.

My baby wasn’t that huge, but not small, 8 1/2 lbs. and I’m very short and short waisted. At last pre-natal OB said the baby was head down. I had also clearly dropped. Baby turned in labor. In the hospital. 

It happens. This blind trust that everything will be great because someone has an MD is crazy. 

 

[just_ordinary]

If course all those things can happen. It is also possible they happen to the same person or in the same family again and again. But it is STATISTICALLY HIGHLY UNLIKELY. That and what I know (because it was shown, written and talked about by them) about prenatal care and labour is the basis of my judgement. And of course it goes through a filter of personal experiences.

Someone with different personal experiences will interpret the date differently.

[FaithAndReason]

On 8/1/2018 at 10:54 PM, AtlanticTug said:

To me Gideon is the most likely candidate for having been born to a mother with fairly out of control gestational diabetes. All the hallmarks are there: typically inappropriate maternal weight gain in the first half of pregnancy (Joy was enormous), large baby, catch-down (ie huge baby turns extremely thin and basically drops in percentiles until they reach they weight they would have been but for the extra sugar), mother fairly rapidly sheds weight post-natally. I am almost at the point of no doubt with that one.

 

I have long wondered if all the Duggar girls have had gestational diabetes. It can be an inherited trait. They are all having these huge babies. I know that Jessa was big when she was born but that doesn't really explain so many gigantic babies. I've been wondering about this since Jill had Izzy.

With (I am guessing) little to no pre-natal care, combined with Jill's know-it-all attitude regarding everything generally and birthing specifically, none of these girls seem to be properly monitored during their pregnancies. If they would get actual real pre-natal care throughout their pregnancies they could control the diabetes and control the size of their babies. I had GD with #2, caught early on, was able to diet control my blood sugars and baby was 8 lb 3 oz at birth, no section. Then when we had #3, doctor immediately was watching my sugars and I was immediately watching my diet. Baby was 7 lb 10 oz no section. Some regular medical care might help them from having c-sections. Not to mention improving the health of themselves and their babies during pregnancy. 

[Mama Mia]

37 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

If course all those things can happen. It is also possible they happen to the same person or in the same family again and again. But it is STATISTICALLY HIGHLY UNLIKELY. That and what I know (because it was shown, written and talked about by them) about prenatal care and labour is the basis of my judgement. And of course it goes through a filter of personal experiences.

Someone with different personal experiences will interpret the date differently.

Really ? We are talking a total of 12 births ( 5 - Anna, 2 - Jill, 2- Jessa, 1 - Joy, 1- Kendra, 1- Jinger ) . 3 of those have been c-sections.That’s 25%. The c-section rate in Arkansas is  32% ( although they are apparently doing a good job of bringing it down ) .

Additionally, 1 had a post-birth complication that was addressed and fixed.

How is ANY of that statistically unlikely? 

[bananabread]

On 8/1/2018 at 11:54 PM, AtlanticTug said:

I never want to say a baby isn’t cute but pretty much all other Duggar newborn grandkids were cuter to me as compared to Felicity...also my 6 month old is literally the world’s most beautiful child (I got stopped twice on street on vacation yesterday to be told she looks like Audrey Hepburn) so now I’m a snob lol.

I'm going to have to be shallow and agree with you. I don't usually find babies very attractive, but I think most of the Duggar grandkids have been REALLY cute. All the M kids, Spurgeon, Gideon, Samuel, Izzy (despite Jillard's awful photos)...but Felicity is not a very attractive infant.

However, lots of homely babies grow into cute kids. Jessa's son Henry certainly wasn't a looker in his earliest days, and he's now SO precious. So I'm sure Felicity will be fine in the long run.   Mr. Bananabread was one strange looking baby, and he's now plenty cute.

[spatulahandeddancer]

22 minutes ago, Mama Mia said:

Really ? We are talking a total of 12 births ( 5 - Anna, 2 - Jill, 2- Jessa, 1 - Joy, 1- Kendra, 1- Jinger ) . 3 of those have been c-sections.That’s 25%. The c-section rate in Arkansas is  32% ( although they are apparently doing a good job of bringing it down ) .

Additionally, 1 had a post-birth complication that was addressed and fixed.

How is ANY of that statistically unlikely? 

If we want to get really technical, we shouldn't necessarily count Anna and Kendra, since we're looking at difficult births within the same family. If Duggar women are predisposed to have difficult labors/big babies/etc AND they aren't getting proper prenatal care/making poor choices about labor (I acknowledge that this is speculation), that is significant.  If you take out Anna and Kendra and only look at Duggar daughters, that's 6 births, 3 c-sections and 1 post-birth complication.  That jumps to a 50% c-section rate among Duggars, which is obviously much higher than the average.

[Mama Mia]

18 minutes ago, spatulahandeddancer said:

If we want to get really technical, we shouldn't necessarily count Anna and Kendra, since we're looking at difficult births within the same family. If Duggar women are predisposed to have difficult labors/big babies/etc AND they aren't getting proper prenatal care/making poor choices about labor (I acknowledge that this is speculation), that is significant.  If you take out Anna and Kendra and only look at Duggar daughters, that's 6 births, 3 c-sections and 1 post-birth complication.  That jumps to a 50% c-section rate among Duggars, which is obviously much higher than the average.

It is higher than average, but 1- There is zero reason to exclude the non-Duggar born women if your intent is to compare the types of care they received and the social aspects of their pregnancies. Particularly Anna , who seems to most closely share their beliefs and practices. and who has had 5 ( apparently ) non-complicated births. If anything you would exclude Jinger as she received care in a differnt state. 2- Jill’s 2nd birth was a repeat c-section, which obviously has a much higher rate than primary. 3 - You can not draw any valid statistical conclusion from a sample of and 4 women with 6 births. That’s ludicrous. 

 

Okay, going to find a way to ignore this, makes me WAY too heated.

[just_ordinary]

1 hour ago, Mama Mia said:

Really ? We are talking a total of 12 births ( 5 - Anna, 2 - Jill, 2- Jessa, 1 - Joy, 1- Kendra, 1- Jinger ) . 3 of those have been c-sections.That’s 25%. The c-section rate in Arkansas is  32% ( although they are apparently doing a good job of bringing it down ) .

Additionally, 1 had a post-birth complication that was addressed and fixed.

How is ANY of that statistically unlikely? 

As far as I know the c-section rate of planned homebirths (with a midwife attending) is about 5% in the US. 

But I was talking about big babies turning in active labour.