Dillards 82: Derick Spills the Tea

[JesSky03]

8 hours ago, SisNancy said:

Except this value you speak of isn’t even practiced in catholic hospitals in the US.  A fetuses life is valued above a mother and women have died needing life saving procedures.   

I would be curious about sources as well. I work for a catholic hospital and this hasn't been my experience at all. I just had a case where a woman came in to the ER 4-5 months pregnant who was dilating and contracting. The ER doc didn't think he was capable of performing a cerclage but a more advanced hospital an hour away was willing to do the procedure. Unfortunately between the distance and the risks and there still being potential of the woman having a premie she decided it was too much of a financial burden and opted to deliver the fetus. The doctor didn't pressure her one way or the other and when she chose to deliver she was admitted and taken care of. 

 

 

[JenniferJuniper]

10 hours ago, Idlewild said:

I think in one of his twitter rants in early December DD mentioned TLC would have a lawsuit coming their way. His Instagram comments seem to imply they were worried about TLC suing them if they didn’t continue. I think the latter is nonsense- if they never had a contract & weren’t paid then what could TLC  sue them for. I think this is DD trying to be clever when people ask the obvious question- why didn’t you quit a lot sooner?

I agree. I doubt DD is THAT dumb.  I can, however, hear JB telling Jilly Muffin that "the family" (meaning JB) would be sued if Jill didn't cooperate with ongoing TLC filming.  Jill may have been in a very fragile state at the time, and DD may have gone along for that reason and for the benefits he did get out of the Jill/Jessa show. 

[nausicaa]

45 minutes ago, MoonFace said:

Bolding is mine.   Do you think it would ever have entered Boob's head that he was passing off a (beyond her control!) 'soiled dove' to future sons in law because his daughters were not (through no fault of their own!) as pure as someone who was not molested? 

No. There was talk of this at the time of the molestation news being confirmed, and I've never believed it. For all JB's flaws, I really think he loves his girls (even more than the boys) and did not see them this way at all after the molestation (despite what his disgusting beliefs may be).

I think he really believed Jill in particular was the bees' knees and went along with this relationship because Derick seemed to make Jill so happy. And in their social circles and region, Jill was a perfectly normal marriage age. 

I've never gotten the impression JB really pushes his daughters into marriage (look at Jana). And maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I do think if one of his daughters were engaged and came to him and said "Daddy, I just don't feel right about this," or especially "Daddy, he isn't good to me," I do think he would call off the wedding and not give a shit about appearances. He's a different king of his castle than Steve Maxwell and Steve Anderson in that way. 

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

2 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Do you have any links to source this?

yeah, click the underlined words, those are my links. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

1 minute ago, nausicaa said:

No. There was talk of this at the time of the molestation news being confirmed, and I've never believed it. For all JB's flaws, I really think he loves his girls (even more than the boys) and did not see them this way at all after the molestation (despite what his disgusting beliefs may be).

I think he really believed Jill in particular was the bees' knees and went along with this relationship because Derick seemed to make Jill so happy. And in their social circles and region, Jill was a perfectly normal marriage age. 

I've never gotten the impression JB really pushes his daughters into marriage (look at Jana). And maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I do think if one of his daughters were engaged and came to him and said "Daddy, I just don't feel right about this," or especially "Daddy, he isn't good to me," I do think he would call off the wedding and not give a shit about appearances. He's a different king of his castle than Steve Maxwell and Steve Anderson in that way. 

I agree with all of this and can't really put my finger on why, but I do.

I think if any of the girls called him tonight and said they were being mistreated he would step in - just find some way to rationalize why divorce or whatever was okay in this specific instance.  

[Idlewild]

8 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I agree with all of this and can't really put my finger on why, but I do.

I think if any of the girls called him tonight and said they were being mistreated he would step in - just find some way to rationalize why divorce or whatever was okay in this specific instance.  

But he was prepared to downplay abuse at the hands of their own brother and dismiss it as ‘happens all the time in Christian families’?? 

[nausicaa]

2 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I agree with all of this and can't really put my finger on why, but I do.

I think if any of the girls called him tonight and said they were being mistreated he would step in - just find some way to rationalize why divorce or whatever was okay in this specific instance.  

Some of it's patriarchal in a way. JB's daughters are a part of his castle. And son, you ain't gonna come around and disrespect JB like that. 

I think he has a lot of competitiveness issues with other men, and this is one way that they manifest. 

But like I said, I also think he does genuinely love his kids and wants them to be happy and well-treated. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

1 minute ago, nausicaa said:

Some of it's patriarchal in a way. JB's daughters are a part of his castle. And son, you ain't gonna come around and disrespect JB like that. 

I think he has a lot of competitiveness issues with other men, and this is one way that they manifest. 

But like I said, I also think he does genuinely love his kids and wants them to be happy and well-treated. 

Great points.

I, too, believe he loves his kids.  I'm not sure if he loves the girls more or if it's just easier for him to express it to the girls.  (Unlike say, Rick Arndt, who is unusual for being an affectionate and hands on dad with all of them when they were small.)

In contrast I have never seen anything from Michelle that looks like genuine love or affection for her children past her buddy stage.  I have a feeling their only source of parental love is JB ...if he were more aware I wonder if it would bother him, but I think his ability to cling to denial is as strong as hers, in his own way.

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

1 hour ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I agree with all of this and can't really put my finger on why, but I do.

I think if any of the girls called him tonight and said they were being mistreated he would step in - just find some way to rationalize why divorce or whatever was okay in this specific instance.  

I don't know, while I agree he loves them, he didn't do anything to protect them when Josh molested them, and they were little girls, and look what he did with Anna after it was discovered Josh was cheating on her, he isolated her at the TTH. 

While I'd like to think he would do anything to get them out of an abusive relationship I'm not sure he would. Sadly, I think there would be lots of prayer as to why she was being mistreated and how to stop it by figuring out what she is doing wrong and what she can do to be a better wife.  Remember in fundycultland women are always at fault in all things, because if they were better men wouldn't have to beat them, rape them, or cheat on them. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

7 minutes ago, Idlewild said:

But he was prepared to downplay abuse at the hands of their own brother and dismiss it as ‘happens all the time in Christian families’?? 

I'm not excusing that at all.  It was horrific the way he left them unprotected.

I think he couldn't process it when it was his son, but an outsider treating them badly would be far less complicated for him.  I do think he'd step in because throwing the other party to the wolves wouldn't be a conflict for him.

And of course I don't know these people and am only going off of media presence like everyone else so who really knows?

4 minutes ago, allthegoodnamesrgone said:

look what he did with Anna after it was discovered Josh was cheating on her, he isolated her at the TTH. 

Right - because it's Anna.  An expendable outsider, I absolutely think his son and his brand comes way ahead of concern, if any, of her well being.

[Alisamer]

48 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

In contrast I have never seen anything from Michelle that looks like genuine love or affection for her children past her buddy stage. 

Every time I have ever seen Michelle asked about having so many kids she only ever talks about "that precious little baby!" and never says a word about the actual, non-infant children. I don't think she likes kids all that much, but she LOVES babies. Maybe she's better once they're adults, IDK, but I feel like she probably ignored the children in favor of the current baby for basically all of their childhood.

She should probably have just gotten a reborn doll and been a crazy reborn baby mommy. They don't grow up and have to be actually raised.

[AtlanticTug]

1 hour ago, JenniferJuniper said:

I agree. I doubt DD is THAT dumb.  I can, however, hear JB telling Jilly Muffin that "the family" (meaning JB) would be sued if Jill didn't cooperate with ongoing TLC filming.  Jill may have been in a very fragile state at the time, and DD may have gone along for that reason and for the benefits he did get out of the Jill/Jessa show. 

I agree with this.

I have always maintained, for no reason other than the application of common sense and having been a lawyer my entire professional life, that there is only one contract, between a corporation (incorporated by JimBob, of which he is the sole shareholder) and TLC. It's now possible that there is a second contract as between the Vuolos and TLC, but that's inconsequential to our discussion of the Dillards and their understanding of how things work.

What is most likely happening is that JimBob is sitting on a giant pile of cash, which he's holding on to in the corporation, both because he is cheap, and for legitimate tax deferral/avoidance reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if he's spent very little of the $ he got from TLC - instead he may have invested some of it upfront in various properties, then lived off the passive income generated by those properties (via leases/rent) combined with the profits earned on flipping other properties, which could have been sizeable given that he renovated them on the cheap, with an almost endless source of free labour and cheap supplies/finishes. The Duggars now live comfortably but not extravagantly. Yes, they have Apple watches and the married kids are supported by JimBob and Michelle, but those kids don't live extravagantly (think about Jessa's small house, JoKen living in a cabin on the property, Josh living in that weird shed storage thing) and generally had cheap ass weddings to boot. The issue the kids should take with him, but none other than Jill by way of Derick proxy are willing to, is that he should have been paying them out of the funds received from TLC in some proportionate way, or made them shareholders in the corporation, or set up trusts for them and so on. There is simply no evidence that he's shelled out any significant cash at all which puts him in an additionally advantageous position - he may be Lording over a couple of million bucks or more but he can't live forever. Aside from Joy/Austin who appear to have a work ethic and aside from Derick, who for all his poor decisions at least will have 2 highly marketable professional skills/designations in about a year or so, nobody else seems interested in working or getting a job. So better stay in Daddy's good graces and have your name in nice bold print on that will...

If DD and Jill wanted out of filming for whatever reason, I fully believe that JimBob would have told them that "they'd" be sued for breach of contract (i.e. non-performance). Anybody who understands privity of contract would know that the Dillards could not have been sued directly but  who knows how JB framed it and if they were still on reasonably good terms with the family at that point, Derick could well have taken the view that it's not worth [the family] getting sued. Particularly if JimBob was still buttering his bread at that point. And since Derick lies and obfuscates, it's quite possible that he's now taking the route of pretending that he was told that he'd personally be sued when nobody ever actually articulated that.

[Peaches-n-Beans]

3 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Great points.

I, too, believe he loves his kids.  I'm not sure if he loves the girls more or if it's just easier for him to express it to the girls.  (Unlike say, Rick Arndt, who is unusual for being an affectionate and hands on dad with all of them when they were small.)

In contrast I have never seen anything from Michelle that looks like genuine love or affection for her children past her buddy stage.  I have a feeling their only source of parental love is JB ...if he were more aware I wonder if it would bother him, but I think his ability to cling to denial is as strong as hers, in his own way.

I don't think this is true across the board, look at how she is with Josie. She is way more affectionate to her then I've ever seen her with any of the others. In fact, one thing that struck me the most about the funeral episode was the fact that she only comforted Josie. From the way Michelle acts with Josie one might think Josie was her only actual child. Which at this point is basically the case, we all know Jana does all the raising for the younger kids. 

[patsymae]

21 hours ago, Galbin said:

As a practicing Catholic, I have to point out that that is incorrect. The principle of double effect applies in such situations, and this means that intent is everything. So they try to save both mother and baby, but the baby's life is not valued above the mother's. In fact, actions to help the mother may result in the unintentional death of the baby, but the key word there is unintentional.

 

Glad to hear it. That's certainly not what my parents thought.

3 hours ago, Alisamer said:

Every time I have ever seen Michelle asked about having so many kids she only ever talks about "that precious little baby!" and never says a word about the actual, non-infant children. I don't think she likes kids all that much, but she LOVES babies. Maybe she's better once they're adults, IDK, but I feel like she probably ignored the children in favor of the current baby for basically all of their childhood.

She should probably have just gotten a reborn doll and been a crazy reborn baby mommy. They don't grow up and have to be actually raised.

When they were in the salon with Ben's mother and Jessa was trying on dresses (I think that was when), all Michelle had to say was pretty soon there will be grandbabies. Gwin was kind of like WTF.

[SisNancy]

12 hours ago, Four is Enough said:

Can you link to the research backing up this statement?

https://www.aclu.org/blog/reproductive-freedom/religion-and-reproductive-rights/catholic-hospitals-denied-these-women

there is a lot of news articles that discuss women dying from care being denied to them while pregnant.   Some from 2019.  ACLU is reputable from a quick search, in this article these women are alive but could have died.   
 

this is an older source but same idea.   Catholic hospital denies care because heart beat in fetus but mother needs care.    Won’t care for mother until something terrible happens like sepsis   Then transfers her.  Resulting in harm to mother.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2636458/

Its not new just catholic hospitals are the only access some people have.   A woman with an ectopic shouldnt have to wait for a rupture or lack of a heartbeat to have treatment.  

 

 

 

8 hours ago, JesSky03 said:

I would be curious about sources as well. I work for a catholic hospital and this hasn't been my experience at all. I just had a case where a woman came in to the ER 4-5 months pregnant who was dilating and contracting. The ER doc didn't think he was capable of performing a cerclage but a more advanced hospital an hour away was willing to do the procedure. Unfortunately between the distance and the risks and there still being potential of the woman having a premie she decided it was too much of a financial burden and opted to deliver the fetus. The doctor didn't pressure her one way or the other and when she chose to deliver she was admitted and taken care of. 

 

 

Right but this isn’t the doctor removing those baby.  A physician cannot perform a procedure on a patient when the patient doesn’t consent.    I’m talking about a patient needing a procedure (abortion) for whatever reason and it’s denied because the fetus still has a heartbeat.   It results in delayed care, and serious medical neglect and in some cases death in the mother.   

[laPapessaGiovanna]

12 hours ago, allthegoodnamesrgone said:

yeah, click the underlined words, those are my links. 

One link refers to Ireland where laws are currently being updated to the XXI century and hopefully this means nothing like that will happen again in the future. The other refers to a case happened in the US 20 years ago. Do you have more current sources?

4 hours ago, SisNancy said:

there is a lot of news articles that discuss women dying from care being denied to them while pregnant.   Some from 2019.  ACLU is reputable from a quick search, in this article these women are alive but could have died

ACLU is a reputable source, but in this case it's not accurate when it says that "women in Ireland and Italy died when their pregnancies went horribly awry and were refused a life-saving abortion because of the religious views of their providers". It seems like it throws in the two countries because those are well known majority Catholic countries and while it can't be denied that Ireland is just now getting on the right track to properly provide care for pregnant women you can't really say that the situation is the same in Italy. Following the link to the Italian case and looking it up on Italian news you will find out that the case is being discussed in court and that the doctors aren't charged for violation of our laws about abortion (law says abortion can be performed up to 12 weeks as elective abortion and after that mark in cases of malformations or whenever the mother's life is at risk) but criminal negligence and malpractice for not having diagnosed and cured the sepsis that killed her, if they had diagnosed the sepsis on time they would have started the right course of antibiotics and procedures that were in place to immediately call an abortionist ob/gyn. The parents of the dead woman have alleged to the press that she died because she was denied an abortion, but this is not what the medical records say. Parents also allege that medical records were altered, but this hasn't been proved yet. It's also worth noting that this is the only similar case I can find in Italy. This doesn't diminish the preventable suffering this woman had to endure and her avoidable death. What happened to her is heartbreaking and inhumane, but we need to be accurate in ascertaining what went wrong if we want to prevent anything similar from happening ever again.

With this I am not denying that a problem exists (statistics about pregnancy related death in the US are chilling) and as an agnostic/nearly atheist person myself I am very wary of religiously affiliated medical practices, but we need to be accurate when we report news, scaremongering isn't helpful and could potentially put people at risk preventing them from seeking emergency care at the nearest hospital.

Edited January 3, 2020 by laPapessaGiovanna
Grammar

[Melissa1977]

13 hours ago, nausicaa said:

 For all JB's flaws, I really think he loves his girls (even more than the boys) 

I've never gotten the impression JB really pushes his daughters into marriage (look at Jana). And maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I do think if one of his daughters were engaged and came to him and said "Daddy, I just don't feel right about this," or especially "Daddy, he isn't good to me," I do think he would call off the wedding and not give a shit about appearances. He's a different king of his castle than Steve Maxwell and Steve Anderson in that way. 

He's the father who hide one of the most damaging kinds of abuse and made his beloved daughters forgive the abuser with no therapy but praying. We know Josh was beaten and shaved and humilliated, but that in no way heals the victims. 

He made his elder daughters servants. He made Jenni cry and mocked her. He left an extremely weak preemie at home with her sisters and went abroad (and of course Josie got sick and Jill and Jana were scared and Josie could have died... But he and her wife put "vacation for Jesus" first. Is it loving your daugthers?).

I think he has some kind of affection for his children, yes. Like most fathers. But some affection is not enough, parenting needs action, not words or a few tears in a wedding.

[Idlewild]

I see DD is suggesting on Instagram that TLC should “give the kids their own show”. So much for the evil insanity inducing TLC. 

Does it ever register on the Duggar/Dillard radar that maybe they should just get on with their lives and work for a living without relying on the TV cash if they want peace of mind. This isn’t about mental well-being. It’s about money.

[JesSky03]

7 hours ago, SisNancy said:

 

Right but this isn’t the doctor removing those baby.  A physician cannot perform a procedure on a patient when the patient doesn’t consent.    I’m talking about a patient needing a procedure (abortion) for whatever reason and it’s denied because the fetus still has a heartbeat.   It results in delayed care, and serious medical neglect and in some cases death in the mother.   

That's a fair assessment but that was just a most recent situation that was fresh on my mind and a situation where the fetus had a chance to be saved. Our hospital will still perform D&Cs when necessary or remove an ectopic pregnancy. I've never seen anyone turned away who needed one. There have been situations where women have had both an ectopic pregnancy and a uterine pregnancy but that doesn't stop them from removing the ectopic even if it puts the uterine pregnancy at risk. I've seen them take a woman back and remove a fetus that had a heartbeat but had implanted somewhere near the rectum. Again, just my experience working for a Catholic based hospital. 

[SassyPants]

1 hour ago, Idlewild said:

I see DD is suggesting on Instagram that TLC should “give the kids their own show”. So much for the evil insanity inducing TLC. 

Does it ever register on the Duggar/Dillard radar that maybe they should just get on with their lives and work for a living without relying on the TV cash if they want peace of mind. This isn’t about mental well-being. It’s about money.

I’m riding the old, idle speculation bus this fine morning, so here goes. I don’t think DD has the ultimate beef with TLC. I think JB is the true target. I don’t for 1 second think that JB exposed Josh’s full transgressions to anyone, let alone future/potential in-laws or spouses. If Josh was fully forgiven by all, why would JB need to pass this information on to others? I think between the molestation and the realization that Jill was not an independent thinking, educated midwife and willing missionary, DD felt scammed. I think DD finally realized the best way to retaliate was to go after JB’s pocketbook. Also, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that JB had a vote and voice in TLC’s decision to sack the Dillards. I truly believe DD’s anger is aimed at JB for selling DD a false bill of goods. JB is both cunning and underhanded-  TLC is merely a shiny penny in this scenario.

[SisNancy]

4 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

 

With this I am not denying that a problem exists (statistics about pregnancy related death in the US are chilling) and as an agnostic/nearly atheist person myself I am very wary of religiously affiliated medical practices, but we need to be accurate when we report news, scaremongering isn't helpful and could potentially put people at risk preventing them from seeking emergency care at the nearest hospital.

This is why I included the other NIH study from several years prior to the death of the Ireland case that’s mentioned in the ACLU article.  A woman in the ACLU article from Michigan was denied timely care and placed in danger because of catholic practices.   It was a big deal at the time.   She’s part of what kicked off the big ACLU lawsuit.   It weakens ACLUs case to mentions what happens in another country but the example that those practices can and could lead could lead to death.   Here is another journal article mentioning delays in care.   Warning it may be upsetting as it details again slightly older from 2008 but most recent published studies you need logins for.   I’m being lazy and not logging into school today   https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2007.126730

I will also retract my words a bit too after hearing not all facilities practice the same way, having to live near some that practice in the ways mentioned that place women in harms way is what I see and know about.  

[AtlanticTug]

3 hours ago, Idlewild said:

I see DD is suggesting on Instagram that TLC should “give the kids their own show”. So much for the evil insanity inducing TLC. 

Does it ever register on the Duggar/Dillard radar that maybe they should just get on with their lives and work for a living without relying on the TV cash if they want peace of mind. This isn’t about mental well-being. It’s about money.

Well, for Derick, the kids getting their own show would accomplish several goals: (i) make him financially secure, (ii) make JimBob lose his main source of revenue, and (iii) dilute JimBob's rule over all the kids. So he'd be killing several birds with one stone.

We know that the Duggars did not instill any sort of work ethic into their kids, and out of the in-laws, only Austin seems to be prepared to roll up his sleeves and get to work. Derick and Jeremy have absolutely no excuse, having received university educations and in Derick's case one very marketable professional designation, with a second to soon follow. But why 9-5 when you can grift and smile for the cameras?

[Idlewild]

10 minutes ago, AtlanticTug said:

Well, for Derick, the kids getting their own show would accomplish several goals: (i) make him financially secure, (ii) make JimBob lose his main source of revenue, and (iii) dilute JimBob's rule over all the kids. So he'd be killing several birds with one stone.

We know that the Duggars did not instill any sort of work ethic into their kids, and out of the in-laws, only Austin seems to be prepared to roll up his sleeves and get to work. Derick and Jeremy have absolutely no excuse, having received university educations and in Derick's case one very marketable professional designation, with a second to soon follow. But why 9-5 when you can grift and smile for the cameras?

I agree entirely but it does show DD for the hypocrite he is ( no, I’m not fainting with surprise here). All his previous rants about TLC, they abuse children, distort family life, work people like dogs- all this would disappear if only that fat cheque were made payable to D Dillard? 
Now holding my season ticket on the speculation bus... isn’t JB listed as executive producer on CO? This is all about DD falling out & being cut out of the show IMHO. 

[nokidsmom]

2 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I think between the molestation and the realization that Jill was not an independent thinking, educated midwife and willing missionary, DD felt scammed. I think DD finally realized the best way to retaliate was to go after JB’s pocketbook. Also, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that JB had a vote and voice in TLC’s decision to sack the Dillards. I truly believe DD’s anger is aimed at JB for selling DD a false bill of goods. JB is both cunning and underhanded-  TLC is merely a shiny penny in this scenario.

I think this gets to the heart of things.   DD didn't really know Jill that well when they married and to be fair, he was going though a lot at the time of his marriage (father's death, mom's serious illness) so he was vulnerable.   That doesn't make JB any less cunning and dishonest.  Also I believe DD was not told the full extent of the molestations, any more than Anna was.  I can only image DD's shock when the real story came to light and assuming Jill has opened up about it since, that shock has not abated.

Yes, I think DD may be stretching the truth on some things and he's shown his ass many times.  While I think he has some legitimate beefs with his father-in-law, frankly he should stop the tweets, concentrate on his law school so he can get that degree and focus on his own career.  The tweets look petty and pathetic even if there are grains of truth in them.   If he really wants to get to JB, get completely independent of him.  DD's already got one marketable degree in addition to the expected law degree.  He and Jill can build an independent life. 

While he and Jill have been off the show, he's still getting riled up about it.   Forget the dog and pony show and get on with life.  Personally I think he and Jill will be much better off the sooner they do this.  

[kmachete14]

honestly i think JB treated Anna the way he'd treat his own daughters in the situation, and I think he did it out of love and concern. 

Anna's husband wasn't there for her, he was at this psuedo-rehabilitation at Jesus camp. So, JB took her in as a daughter and had her live as his own child, basically. If one of his daughters had scummy/abusive husband, I think he'd welcome them back with open arms while it was sorted out.

Do I think the Josh thing was sorted out? No, but in JB's mind, he took in Anna and helped her out until her marriage could resume. 

The only difference with his own girls is that he might help them leave the marriage eventually, which I don't think he would want Anna to leave Josh (his son).