Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal
HerNameIsBuffy

Seewalds 43: Pants may Have Been Worn Or Not

Recommended Posts

nst
On 7/3/2020 at 1:05 AM, CarrotCake said:

Or maybe she got a new couch and wants to keep it clean.

she probably tells the kids the story of each  birth and shows them the actual couch which is covered somewhere behind the scenes in a storage shed. 

and yes the woman is going on about adopting again 

i believe it when I see it. 

notice how ben covered up when he was like - we are entertaining couples...- they have been entertaining couples since she had spurgeon. 

storyline season....

 

On 7/3/2020 at 11:55 AM, Bad Wolf said:

On please. They're never going to adopt. They don't have a steady income, their house is small, and they're probably going to want a white blue eyed  newborn. It's just for attention...again.

they need a new house 

On 7/1/2020 at 11:17 PM, meep said:

I'm guessing things in Ben-and-Jessa-land are boring right now. 

as they have been 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LacyMay
Posted (edited)

I understand the conflicting feelings about couples adopting when they already have multiple bio children. And I don't think that the Seewalds as they are now should adopt (who knows, maybe in 5 years they have evolved and become less enmeshed in the cult. They do seem to genuinely enjoy being parents.)

I just get frustrated when I hear the old trope that people should only adopt if they've tried and tried to conceive and couldn't. And that somehow choosing to adopt *instead* of choosing to have bio children is somehow selfish or unfair. 

I'm also a bit moody these last few days and may be completely overreacting and being overly sensitive.

 

Edited by LacyMay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Idlewild

I do get the point about couples adopting, especially adopting babies when they already have children. Jessa & Ben cannot begin to understand the slow pain of infertility and it does seem like they are very breezily considering adoption as one might consider getting a pet. ( I realise they are very unlikely to ever actually adopt).

in many places once you’ve exhausted all the possibilities of trying to conceive, adoption is another slow and sometimes painful journey- it is insensitive of them to keep using it as click bait- but that’s how Jessa was brought up. 

  • Upvote 5
  • I Agree 5
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
neuroticcat
20 hours ago, keep_my_spleen said:

But Jessa . . . I'm worried if anyone wants to adopt because of their savior complex, ...

This. Also don’t forget the evangelism opportunity. When the Above Rubies compound decided Liberian orphans needed “saving” tons of fundie families responded...and many adopted children got re-adopted or sent back to Liberia. Adopting kids is an opportunity to save their souls with proper evangelism.

I think the mix of Quiverfull attitudes toward maximum amount of children plus Savior complex plus JOY (Jesus first, others second, yourself last) equals considering adoption kind of an obligation for these families. Remember JB and Michelle were “open” to it too?

Maybe Jessa genuinely wants adoption or considered it at some point. But the logic says that a philosophy that doesn’t permit couples to say, “You know? We love children but think it wise to space pregnancies.” Or “We’ve come to see we can only manage two children in a healthy way” or “We would enjoy a small family.” Or any other sensible reason for family planning at all also cannot let them say, “You know? Adoption might not be for us”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wendy-sparkles

I do think Jessa and Ben would probably be one of the less/least terrible Duggar couples to adopt, but that's a pretty low bar to clear. It seems super unlikely to me though, unless it was a private adoption via their community/ someone they knew, because of the likelihood of them having a new baby every year or two for the foreseeable future. Maybe the most likely scenario is eg how Jim Bob and Michelle are guardians for Tyler now, although I don't think he's been officially adopted.

I understand that there would be not insignificant costs also? and they would need a new house/ their house probably needs an extension at some point if they continue to grow their family eg if they had a baby on the way and a child joining their family via adoption in the near future. Since their only income seems to be via the show (via Jim Bob?) and Ben tutoring the Duggar kids when he's not studying, this seems unfeasible. 

Ben does seem to have the best understanding of race and racism, and the most interest in other cultures, out of all the Duggars though, although obviously interracial adoption has the potential to be problematic/damaging and particularly in Jessa and Ben's community.

It just seems super unlikely though, especially when they've been saying this since they were first married, and the extent of their progress is talking to friends who have adopted. Does anyone remember the family they had to dinner/ babysat for on the show who had an adopted daughter? I'm pretty sure Spurgeon was a baby, at this rate they might be finalising their first adoption when he's 18.

I think, in terms of whether couples with children should be able to adopt the answer has to be, what is best for the child. So, where a family that already has children is a better fit, that should take priority over a childless couple wanting to build their family, as hard as that might be for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
medimus

I don't think they are seriously going to adopt any time soon and am also slightly expecting a pregnancy announcement as part of the new season.

I do continue to marvel at adoption in the US, someone mentioned 35000$! Goodness. Adoption rarely happens here. There were 72 domestic adoptions in 2018 (the latest year with figures). 72. In the whole country. That includes step parent adoptions (the partner of the parent who has been living with the child and parent for more than two years; 35), long term foster to adoption (25), foreign-to-domestic adoption (3) and extended family adoption (2), as well as infant adoption of which there were only 7. Plus 42 intercountry adoptions from the 10 approved countries, three of which haven't had any adoptions since at least 2012. Interestingly more than half of the intercountry adoptions are from a single country and the second largest group, about a third, are from the US.

"Just adopt" is the biggest lie going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tangy Bee

Isn't somewhere in Africa that now bans Americans from adopting  because of the multiple cases of child abuse and death. I remember a few cases where the children were adopted by religious fanatic parents.

1 minute ago, Tangy Bee said:

Isn't somewhere in Africa that now bans Americans from adopting  because of the multiple cases of child abuse and death. I remember a few cases where the children were adopted by religious fanatic parents.

Ok, found out it's Ethiopia that has banned foreign adoptions due to concerns of neglect and abuse.

  • Upvote 5
  • Sad 3
  • Thank You 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
just_ordinary

I absolutely don’t get the point. Adoption is not primarily a chance for people to get a child but for children to grow up in a stable and loving environment. If this additionally happens in a family where the parents couldn’t have bio children that’s an added bonus. The children’s welfare should be the highest concern here. And just because you couldn’t have bio children doesn’t mean you are the better environment for a child than a family with existing bio children. 
It’s unfair. Infertility issues are unfair because no one checks people if they are fit to raise children. But that is no reason to go against what is best for the child.

I am aware that there imperfect and unfair conditions surrounding adoption though. The agent should do a individual assessment, looking at it from every angle. Just because you already have children is not equaling being a foster or adoption parent or maybe even a good parent for your own children. Same goes for longing for a child. That’s why I think it’s problematic that some people in FJ truly want a child for Michaela and Brandon. In the public system workers are held from doing a thorough job because of the workload and in the private sector money is the key issue in the end. And obviously some people are just lazy and ignorant.
 

In general I think children shouldn’t be placed in a home where they are raised with damaging mindsets and in the case of Ben and Jessa will very possibly suffer from what I would identify as physical and emotion abuse paired with a good dose of brainwashing and inadequate and intolerable lack of education. Still better than die of starvation but I believe there are better families out there suited to care for children that are desperately in need for a home. 

  • Upvote 17
  • I Agree 1
  • Love 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meggo
3 hours ago, medimus said:

 

"Just adopt" is the biggest lie going.

That's what I was coming here to say. We struggled with infertility for years and did decide to go the adoption route. So we both needed police clearances from every place we had lived since we were 18, we had to have a homestudy done by a woman who admitted at the end that she didn't like us and wasn't sure why she even agreed to write our home study (and then got stuff wrong - clearly she just copied & pasted because no one would think my red headed balding husband had thick dark hair). 
We went to 28 hours of training. And then we waited. And waited. And waited. And redid our police clearances again (they're good for two years) and then we got the call (two calls actually- one private, one public adoption). 

In any case "oh we'd like to adopt" isn't as easy as "we'd really like to go see the Rocky Mountains some day" and it's not a WAY to get pregnant "just adopt - I have a friend who did that and BAM pregnant..." And it's expensive. Home study, 28 hours of training, police clearances, printing up a book of us to intro us to prospective parents and then LITERALLY emailing every single contact (private adoption) at the beginning of every month so you're top of mind. It's not for the faint of heart. 
And THEN where I live - I had to pay some expenses for birth mom and could have had to pay for counseling for her and the bio-dad should they want it. I might have had to pay to track him down to sign off on it. 

It worked out in the end - I have the sweetest little boy in my house (he has his moments - he IS 7 afterall) - and a great relationship with Birth Mom. But - making it out to be the easy route? That's a HUGE lie. 

  • Upvote 8
  • I Agree 1
  • Thank You 1
  • Love 27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
keep_my_spleen

Some Christians (myself included) have the idea that when you do something good for others, and other people commend you for it, saying "Oh, God blessed me" or "I was happy to" makes it so that you did the good thing for others and not yourself.

That makes no sense, let me try to rephrase it.

A big principle of Christianity is doing things for others, right?  I have the feeling that a lot of Christians do things for others so that they can feel good about themselves. Newsflash: That's not doing things for others, that's making yourself feel good in the name of doing things for others.

Case in point: Jessa adopting and being like, "Well, we just really felt like we could help someone out".  Obviously I don't know the condition of your heart, but . . . adopting isn't something people do to feel good about themselves.  Now, I'm not a parent, but that's just my two cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
allthegoodnamesrgone

The only way these two could adopt is if they did private $$ adoption. They are a young fertile couple with no jobs & 5 kids under 5, living in a 2 bedroom 1 bathroom home. I'm also worried that they might try to "rehome" a child if it stops serving a purpose, like that horrible YouTuber who sought out a "special needs child" then dumped him when he wasn't little and cute anymore.  

I have no problem with people adopting whether they can have bio children or not, any loving person who wants to raise a child and keep it out of foster care is fine with me. I have a problem with anyone in the Duggar family or in any religious cult adopting for ANY REASON. 

@keep_my_spleen the fundy/fundylight Christians and many plain conservative don't believe in doing for others, they live by the mantra of "God helps those who help themselves" and if you can't help yourself why should we help you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meggo

I'm pretty sure that there is a rule here (granted - Ontario Canada) about committing to not having another baby or adopting within 18 months of the adopted child coming to live with you. I'm pretty sure we had to agree to that or any adoption would be off the table because they want you to bond with the newly adopted child. 

Pretty sure a Duggar wouldn't use birth control... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
keep_my_spleen
23 minutes ago, allthegoodnamesrgone said:


 the fundy/fundylight Christians and many plain conservative don't believe in doing for others, they live by the mantra of "God helps those who help themselves" and if you can't help yourself why should we help you? 

I don't have any qualms "admitting" that I AM conservative.  However, I agree that there are many Christians who live by legalism rather than seeing the Gospel as a heart issue (which is where I am: Jesus said to love God and love each other, so if you aren't doing those things but claim to be a Christian, you're either a liar or don't know what you're saying).

And I think you're talking about the Stauffers.  Oof.  What a tragedy that could have completely been avoided if he had never gone to the Stauffers in a first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nst

if they do adopt i - i see them fostering at the most, much like someone who be close in their circles.

these two like to play their games.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
allthegoodnamesrgone
1 hour ago, Kailash said:

@allthegoodnamesrgone Jessa and Ben don’t have 5 under 5. They only have 3 children.

Sorry, I meant to say a family of 5 w/ 3 kids under 5. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GuineaPigCourtship

Would exposure to Josh factor into their adoption qualifications? Maybe not because he was never convicted of anything, but we have no knowledge that he is kept away from any of the children in the extended family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
keep_my_spleen

Andddd there's another reason they shouldn't adopt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mpheels
14 hours ago, medimus said:

I don't think they are seriously going to adopt any time soon and am also slightly expecting a pregnancy announcement as part of the new season.

I do continue to marvel at adoption in the US, someone mentioned 35000$! Goodness. Adoption rarely happens here. There were 72 domestic adoptions in 2018 (the latest year with figures). 72. In the whole country. That includes step parent adoptions (the partner of the parent who has been living with the child and parent for more than two years; 35), long term foster to adoption (25), foreign-to-domestic adoption (3) and extended family adoption (2), as well as infant adoption of which there were only 7. Plus 42 intercountry adoptions from the 10 approved countries, three of which haven't had any adoptions since at least 2012. Interestingly more than half of the intercountry adoptions are from a single country and the second largest group, about a third, are from the US.

"Just adopt" is the biggest lie going.

This is really a striking juxtaposition of social safety nets in the US versus other high income countries. Much of the need for adoption in the US is driven by poverty in one way or another (demand* for adoption is less poverty-related, but still tied to our shitty/expensive health care system). If we actually had systems and resources in place to help people who want babies have them, resources to help people care for kids when they do have them, and adequate resources to help people prevent having babies when they don’t want them, then we would not have nearly as much need or demand* for adoption.

*demand isn’t really the right word - children are not commodities - but I can’t think of the right word to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lezajenda

I don't have 30 minutes tonight to watch this YouTube interview, but I thought I'd share in case anyone else has time to kill tonight-Bens parents are promoting a Dr who claims to be curing covid, specifically claiming he has 100% success with his covid patients so....color me intrigued to say the least.  Is he legit? Is he seeing only seeing over privileged healthy people with mild cases and no preexisting conditions? Is he a total quack?  Personally I was surprised to see them post acknowledging the pandemic at all 🤷‍♀️

Screenshot_20200706-183458.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Expectopatronus

@Meggo I had similar garage from the SW who did my home study. She couldn’t refuse my application but was clear that I wasn’t perfect (yes, she said that) and why would she give me a child when there are perfect families waiting (direct quote). So, I could pay $1500 a year to update my home study but I would never be matched with a child. 
She spun everything I said, for example, I didn’t wish to use donor sperm for several reasons but two of them were a) I’m a really poor gene pool and b) my faith community isn’t wild about this option. She wrote “- believes that only genetically superior individuals should be allowed to reproduce and believes that all teachings of the Catholic Church must be unquestioning followed”. Um I support same-sex marriage, have no problem with couples choosing birth control, am hopeful that one day priests will be allowed to marry AND women will be ordained so not an unquestioning follower. I also in no way advocate eugenics but was advised to seek genetic counselling before considering pregnancy due to what conditions I could pass on. 
Adoption is not easy! I’m so happy for you that it had a happy outcome and you have your little boy. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Sad 7
  • WTF 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AussieKrissy
23 minutes ago, Expectopatronus said:

@Meggo I had similar garage from the SW who did my home study. She couldn’t refuse my application but was clear that I wasn’t perfect (yes, she said that) and why would she give me a child when there are perfect families waiting (direct quote). So, I could pay $1500 a year to update my home study but I would never be matched with a child. 
She spun everything I said, for example, I didn’t wish to use donor sperm for several reasons but two of them were a) I’m a really poor gene pool and b) my faith community isn’t wild about this option. She wrote “- believes that only genetically superior individuals should be allowed to reproduce and believes that all teachings of the Catholic Church must be unquestioning followed”. Um I support same-sex marriage, have no problem with couples choosing birth control, am hopeful that one day priests will be allowed to marry AND women will be ordained so not an unquestioning follower. I also in no way advocate eugenics but was advised to seek genetic counselling before considering pregnancy due to what conditions I could pass on. 
Adoption is not easy! I’m so happy for you that it had a happy outcome and you have your little boy. 

Oh Honey, what ding bat. Give me her name and I’ll go and slap sense into her, for you. People are dick heads. #trippinonthepower!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
medimus
8 hours ago, mpheels said:

This is really a striking juxtaposition of social safety nets in the US versus other high income countries. Much of the need for adoption in the US is driven by poverty in one way or another (demand* for adoption is less poverty-related, but still tied to our shitty/expensive health care system). If we actually had systems and resources in place to help people who want babies have them, resources to help people care for kids when they do have them, and adequate resources to help people prevent having babies when they don’t want them, then we would not have nearly as much need or demand* for adoption.

*demand isn’t really the right word - children are not commodities - but I can’t think of the right word to use.

I definitely think this is true. Things I think are a factor (in the order they came in to my head, not any significance)

-easily available, reliable, affordable contraception and education about same, leading to different numbers of unplanned pregnancies

-cultural pressure/peer pressure/expectations about when you will have sex etc. , leading to different numbers of unplanned pregnancies

-availability, affordability and social acceptance of abortion, leading to differing numbers of ongoing pregnancies

-social acceptance of adoption

-laws surrounding adoption: which children are eligble for adoption (until fairly recently children born to married parents were not available for adoption in Ireland!); who gets to adopt; who can adopt children out (the existance of private adoption agencies makes me very wary, they might be fine, but I would want them to all have exactely the same minimum standards etc)

-history of adoption in the country (lots of countries have hideous histories of forced adoption of children born to unmarried mothers etc) that affect how people view adoption

-what the aim of foster care is: temporary care until a permanent home can be found or help so that children can stay with/be reunited with/keep contact with their birth parents 

-social programmes: childcare, education, healthcare etc that help people have a basic standard of living so that children are less likely to be neglected for example so that a parent can work

That's just off the top of my head. I find it all really interesting. I am generally for very strong regulation in this area to protect children. But that should include all the social programmes that help children not fall through the cracks ion the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meggo
10 hours ago, Expectopatronus said:

@Meggo I had similar garage from the SW who did my home study. She couldn’t refuse my application but was clear that I wasn’t perfect (yes, she said that) and why would she give me a child when there are perfect families waiting (direct quote). So, I could pay $1500 a year to update my home study but I would never be matched with a child. 
She spun everything I said, for example, I didn’t wish to use donor sperm for several reasons but two of them were a) I’m a really poor gene pool and b) my faith community isn’t wild about this option. She wrote “- believes that only genetically superior individuals should be allowed to reproduce and believes that all teachings of the Catholic Church must be unquestioning followed”. Um I support same-sex marriage, have no problem with couples choosing birth control, am hopeful that one day priests will be allowed to marry AND women will be ordained so not an unquestioning follower. I also in no way advocate eugenics but was advised to seek genetic counselling before considering pregnancy due to what conditions I could pass on. 
Adoption is not easy! I’m so happy for you that it had a happy outcome and you have your little boy. 

Yeah - our lady was a piece of work. The very last visit she said "I'm not even sure why I agreed to DO this homestudy for you..." She was upset that we - pre placement - hadn't baby proofed our house. I said "I don't know if we're getting a baby, a toddler, or no one at all - I will baby proof as needed." But she made me buy outlet covers for EVERY SINGLE OUTLET we had in our house or the cottage. I STILL have too many damn outlet covers (we didn't use them - our kiddo did not care about outlets)

She sent us our final note (and bill) and got my KIDS NAME WRONG. Like of all the things - to say congratulations on bringing YourSon home - you get the NAME WRONG?? 
Her name was Arlene - but in our home - she will ever be known as Arslene. 
She couldn't understand where all these glowing reports from our friends came from - she couldn't see it with my husband - but did admit that kids really DO love him.. Horrible woman. Horrible. 

@Expectopatronus- I am sorry you had an equally horrible person to deal with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AussieKrissy

I notice Ivy is in normal swimmers. I wonder at what point they will switch her to modesty monstrosities they wear?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.