8 Passengers: Youtuber's Take Son's Bed and Refuse to Give Daughter Lunch

[CTRLZero]

16 minutes ago, clueliss said:

And, also from Jessica Danielle - a video on Johnny & Paige Hanna.

Thank you.  I heard the name “Hanna” mentioned on Jordan & McKay and wondered who the heck they were.  I wonder if Homie is an MLM business model?

I’ve watched a couple Jessica Danielle videos and learned that when Jodi divorced, her husband got custody of their children.  In retrospect, it was fortuitous that happened, just based on how warped Jodi became over time. 

[JermajestyDuggar]

33 minutes ago, CTRLZero said:

Thank you.  I heard the name “Hanna” mentioned on Jordan & McKay and wondered who the heck they were.  I wonder if Homie is an MLM business model?

I’ve watched a couple Jessica Danielle videos and learned that when Jodi divorced, her husband got custody of their children.  In retrospect, it was fortuitous that happened, just based on how warped Jodi became over time. 

And the thing is, she divorced a long time ago. Just based on what I know of the Mormon culture, it’s sort of surprising she was so often referred by the church for marriage counseling when she had been divorced since the 90s. And didn’t people see it as strange that a mother wouldn’t get primary or even 50/50 custody? Plus I believe her children don’t have a relationship with her. I’m not saying you should discriminate against a woman for those things. But I was under the impression that in Mormon culture, people do discriminate against women for those things. 

[FiveAcres]

9 minutes ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

And the thing is, she divorced a long time ago. Just based on what I know of the Mormon culture, it’s sort of surprising she was so often referred by the church for marriage counseling when she had been divorced since the 90s. And didn’t people see it as strange that a mother wouldn’t get primary or even 50/50 custody? Plus I believe her children don’t have a relationship with her. I’m not saying you should discriminate against a woman for those things. But I was under the impression that in Mormon culture, people do discriminate against women for those things. 

My guess is that the LDS church was faced with a big problem when the psychiatric medical profession basically said that there is no such thing as sex addiction or porn addiction, and stopped saying that same sex attraction was pathological. This meant that they couldn't get mainstream insurance coverage (poor as it is) to cover these non-existent mental health issues. Church leaders had to find unethical practitioners and pay upfront for "treatment." And there were bonus points given to practitioners who are willing to tattle to church leaders about their patients.

Hildebrant's MS degree was in Educational Psychology, which I don't think is usually considered to be a clinical degree, unlike say, a Licensed Clinical Social Worker.

[JermajestyDuggar]

34 minutes ago, FiveAcres said:

My guess is that the LDS church was faced with a big problem when the psychiatric medical profession basically said that there is no such thing as sex addiction or porn addiction, and stopped saying that same sex attraction was pathological. This meant that they couldn't get mainstream insurance coverage (poor as it is) to cover these non-existent mental health issues. Church leaders had to find unethical practitioners and pay upfront for "treatment." And there were bonus points given to practitioners who are willing to tattle to church leaders about their patients.

Hildebrant's MS degree was in Educational Psychology, which I don't think is usually considered to be a clinical degree, unlike say, a Licensed Clinical Social Worker.

So here’s my understanding of my state’s licensing. As long as you are able to pass the licensing exam, an MS in educational psychology is probably ok. There are multiple masters degrees you can get that would then be ok for you to sit for the licensing exam. But Utah could be a little different from my state. So I’m not positive. I personally think some masters programs and degrees probably prepare you for the exam better than others.

[waltraute]

Ruby's sister, Bonnie, has stated that we (the public) only know what has been approved to share with the media. She starts crying when she talks about reading the redacted portions of Ruby's journal and her other journals that weren't shared publicly. Apparently, the family was privy to all the evidence a few days before some of it was released to the media. She says we have only seen a fraction of what they have gathered.

 

[Gobsmacked]

26 minutes ago, waltraute said:

Ruby's sister, Bonnie, has stated that we (the public) only know what has been approved to share with the media. She starts crying when she talks about reading the redacted portions of Ruby's journal and her other journals that weren't shared publicly. Apparently, the family was privy to all the evidence a few days before some of it was released to the media. She says we have only seen a fraction of what they have gathered.

 

I’m not a fan of the Griffiths sisters although I do watch their YouTube’s sometimes.  They had no way of knowing what had happened as Ruby had cut them all off. I do feel sorry for them. No one can imagine how they feel now. Not many siblings find out  (thankfully) that one of their own  is so crazy, mean, vicious and cruel. It’s a hard thing to come to terms with for any family.  Bonnie and Joel have done the right thing and taken themselves away from everything. The children are still under state care so can’t be visited by their aunts and uncle Beau yet. I’m presuming that the Griffiths parents haven’t returned to Serbia for their ‘mission’ ? Does any one know? 

[Howl]

14 hours ago, Gobsmacked said:

The children are still under state care so can’t be visited by their aunts and uncle Beau yet.

I re-watched the 20/20 Ruby Franke piece. At the end, it seems an Ivins police officer has seen (?) the kids since they've been in foster care and reports that both are gaining weight, enjoying hobbies and thriving, so maybe the foster care family is in St. George, close to Ivins?  I doubt they'd be in Ivins, too much publicity surrounding the situation.  I hope those kids have total privacy to heal and keep growing.  

Re-watching that show also made me aware of how many of the police/EMS who responded to both houses were moved to tears by the condition of the kids. 

 

[noseybutt]

On 3/31/2024 at 6:54 AM, FiveAcres said:

My guess is that the LDS church was faced with a big problem when the psychiatric medical profession basically said that there is no such thing as sex addiction or porn addiction, and stopped saying that same sex attraction was pathological. This meant that they couldn't get mainstream insurance coverage (poor as it is) to cover these non-existent mental health issues. Church leaders had to find unethical practitioners and pay upfront for "treatment." And there were bonus points given to practitioners who are willing to tattle to church leaders about their patients.

Hildebrant's MS degree was in Educational Psychology, which I don't think is usually considered to be a clinical degree, unlike say, a Licensed Clinical Social Worker.

Yup, LDS church would have preferred problematic porn use be included in DSM-5.

As a professional, I have mixed feelings. The DSM is a highly political document that is primarily used in the US to determine insurance/reimbursement. There is a hot mess of lobbying that happens every time a new edition comes out because of the financial (and legal) impact it has. Because it is so political, it is far less scientific than people realize.

The science around this is super complicated. There has been a real shift with substance use disorders away from diagnostic criteria that focuses on physiological addiction (tolerance, withdrawal) and instead focusing on impairment in functioning (social, employment, legal, health). From an impairment perspective, some of the process addictions do function very similarly as substance use disorders. 

The DSM-5 recognized this with gambling. (Politics much? Turns out some states with legalized gambling have taxed it in order to fund treatment.)

While not all porn use is problematic, there are some extreme situations where, for example, users are not able to make it to work consistently due to time invested or they serve long prison sentences for illegal porn possession. That's some serious impairment in functioning! Also, for some the porn might become a fetish, meaning it's needed for arousal and orgasm. And that often causes a different set of issues within relationships.

All this to say, Jodi Hildebrandt was way off the mark when she classified much of human behavior as addictive. All porn use is not an addiction. Neither is sleeping too much, reading or knitting for hours on end, or wanting to spend time with loved ones. Those are all well within the range of normal human behavior.

But I do wish we had better ways of talking about/diagnosing at the extremes. 

[Hane]

@noseybutt, thanks for your insights re the DSM.

As someone who watches ex-Mormon YouTube content far more than any normal person ever should, I’ve read some huge contributing factors as to why “counselors” like Jodi have been endorsed so strongly by the church: Sex outside marriage is labeled “the sin next to murder.”

Even rare, isolated instances of masturbation or porn viewing are condemned as “addiction.” Teens and adults are pressured to confess them to their bishop, who is supposed to have “the gift of discernment” and know exactly what’s in their hearts. (Bishops have been known to interrogate kids about their sexual thoughts and practices.) People who confess such things are called on to “repent” and are denied the ability to take the “sacrament” at church (similar to communion) or attend ceremonies at the temple—and everyone will notice, even if nothing is said. (Contrast this with Catholic confession, after which penance is a private matter.)

[noseybutt]

2 hours ago, Hane said:

@noseybutt, thanks for your insights re the DSM.

As someone who watches ex-Mormon YouTube content far more than any normal person ever should, I’ve read some huge contributing factors as to why “counselors” like Jodi have been endorsed so strongly by the church: Sex outside marriage is labeled “the sin next to murder.”

Even rare, isolated instances of masturbation or porn viewing are condemned as “addiction.” Teens and adults are pressured to confess them to their bishop, who is supposed to have “the gift of discernment” and know exactly what’s in their hearts. (Bishops have been known to interrogate kids about their sexual thoughts and practices.) People who confess such things are called on to “repent” and are denied the ability to take the “sacrament” at church (similar to communion) or attend ceremonies at the temple—and everyone will notice, even if nothing is said. (Contrast this with Catholic confession, after which penance is a private matter.)

Yeah, I am not hugely knowledgable about LDS culture but one thing that seems different about them (versus, say Jehovah's Witnesses) is that there is a culture of taking care of their own, including providing mental health treatment and marital counseling.

When I was in grad school, a fellow student was having marital issues and he and his wife received counseling from a very high end, well known clinic, courtesy of another Mormon who was on staff. Looking back, I have no idea if that treatment was legit and kept confidential from the bishop, or if they signed some kind of waiver? Who knows. 

But the rest of us, religious or not, had no such access.

It seems to mirror their reliance on public education and then building seminaries right across the street from high schools. Just like there is a mish-mash of public education and private religious teaching, in this case it's a mish-mash of mainstream "therapy" intermixed with the religion doctrine. How much of it is intermixed is hard to know. I am pretty sure most mainstream licensed therapists would not risk loss of licensure by breaking confidentiality and violating HIPAA, but there may be other forms of coercion. IDK.

So the first thing that I would say, I am not familiar with any other US religious group that has such a well-developed counseling system. Maybe some large Evangelical churches? Maybe Catholic services---but no, in the sense that their projects are typically focused on the poor and marginalized, not the worried well with distressed marriages.

The second thing is that whatyou say about even mild sexual behavior being considered problematic rings true. And I wonder how much of the addictive language is promoted by the LDS therapists wanting the gravy train of referrals. I suspect the latter.

[Howl]

This is how you end up with people like Ruby Franke being treated like a goddess of wisdom:  Abigail Shrier has a message for parents: Assert authority in your kid’s life   ‘Bad Therapy’ author argues that therapy has risks for children

It's not really about therapy, it's about parents and therapists supposedly raising children by indulging all their emotions by 'gentle parenting' rather than being disciplinarians.  This is all news to me.  I'd assume that the current mental health crisis in kids might be caused by things like school shootings and the like. 

Although the author is not Christian (she's probably an Orthodox Jew), the book was reviewed on Deseret.com, a Mormon-based news site.  It's not surprising that "assert authority" appears in the title of the article 

[JermajestyDuggar]

28 minutes ago, Howl said:

This is how you end up with people like Ruby Franke being treated like a goddess of wisdom:  Abigail Shrier has a message for parents: Assert authority in your kid’s life   ‘Bad Therapy’ author argues that therapy has risks for children

It's not really about therapy, it's about parents and therapists supposedly raising children by indulging all their emotions by 'gentle parenting' rather than being disciplinarians.  This is all news to me.  I'd assume that the current mental health crisis in kids might be caused by things like school shootings and the like. 

Although the author is not Christian (she's probably an Orthodox Jew), the book was reviewed on Deseret.com, a Mormon-based news site.  It's not surprising that "assert authority" appears in the title of the article 

As a parent to 2 kids, I think there is a happy medium we should all strive for. And that will look different in each family. But I think that there are parents that are basically permissive parents who may think they are gentle parenting. When really it’s not. And I think there are controlling parents who think they are just giving their children structure and discipline. I’m sure I fall in the more gentle parenting camp. People probably think I’m too easy on my kids. But it kind of works for us because if you ask their teachers, they are great kids at school. Sure they have their days when they aren’t perfect. But they generally behave ok at school and at home. They can be a little wild at home. But that mostly just annoys me more than it actually hurting anything. I think parents who struggle will go full steam ahead on one singular way of parenting. And that often doesn’t work. It’s the extremes that typically hurt kids. You have to adapt to all the changes that come with raising kids. You can’t raise your 5 year old exactly the same way when they are 17. 

[CTRLZero]

35 minutes ago, Howl said:

the book was reviewed on Deseret.com, a Mormon-based news site.  It's not surprising that "assert authority" appears in the title of the article 

The LDS church members are probably looking for books like this to reinforce their parental authority.  The church has tried gentler approaches to prevent the membership from declining, but lately they have been building lots of temples, messaging that people need to wear their garments around the clock, and get their children in the habit of engaging with the church and temple more often.  “Think Celestial.”

As far as Ruby Franke, she was probably the type of disciplinarian the book’s author would approve of, until she came under the influence of Jodi Hildebrandt.  I can’t imagine even Shrier would condone torturing young “demon-possessed” children; she might even suggest therapy as a reasonable alternative in that case.

17 minutes ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

I think there is a happy medium we should all strive for

I agree.  

[hoipolloi]

2 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

But it kind of works for us because if you ask their teachers, they are great kids at school.

When our child was in kindergarten his teacher was a highly experienced and skillful instructor of many years who fundamentally loved the children, and they responded to this, as did our kid.

At our first parent-teacher conference, she asked if our child was always well-behaved at home, the way he was in class. We said no, of course, and she said, "GOOD. I worry when children feel pressured to be constantly on their best behavior and never have a chance to have ʻdown timeʻ."

We all need a place to be safe, to relax, to be silly, and to be rude/defiant/angry/upset. If home can't be that place, where else?

[JermajestyDuggar]

15 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

When our child was in kindergarten his teacher was a highly experienced and skillful instructor of many years who fundamentally loved the children, and they responded to this, as did our kid.

At our first parent-teacher conference, she asked if our child was always well-behaved at home, the way he was in class. We said no, of course, and she said, "GOOD. I worry when children feel pressured to be constantly on their best behavior and never have a chance to have ʻdown timeʻ."

We all need a place to be safe, to relax, to be silly, and to be rude/defiant/angry/upset. If home can't be that place, where else?

My boys are only 9 and 11 but sometimes I feel like I live in a frat house. With constant farts, burps, mooning each other and talking about the massive poops they just had. But they wouldn’t ever do that kind of stuff at school. They save it for mom and dad. Gee thanks. 🙄🤣

[Expectopatronus]

According to my daughter’s teacher, 90% of the time at school she listens, does as she’s told, and generally behaves. At home it’s maybe 50%. Age typical, I know but still I get frustrated at times. However, I would never hit her, take away food, her bed, extracurricular activities etc. 

[Howl]

On 4/7/2024 at 11:13 AM, JermajestyDuggar said:

My boys are only 9 and 11 but sometimes I feel like I live in a frat house. With constant farts, burps, mooning each other and talking about the massive poops they just had.

Based on the behavior of a spouse bearing down on 80,  I can tell you they might not grow out of it...

[JermajestyDuggar]

5 minutes ago, Howl said:

Based on the behavior of a spouse bearing down on 80,  I can tell you they might not grow out of it...

Full admission: I think the boys might get it from me. I loved toilet humor as a kid. I guess it’s my payback because my parents never appreciated my toilet humor as a kid. I think my husband was probably a bit more proper in his behavior as a kid. I should ask his mom. Maybe he was also just like the boys. 

[Howl]

So about Kevin.  Horrible human? Clueless dad?  Victim of Jodi H?  I'm a strong yes on his vulnerability to Jodi H.

He  spent a year in a small apartment reading his Bible and trying to be a better Mormon man in order to be united with his family, not realizing that in Jodi World, no man can ever be good enough. 

Meanwhile, Ruby (under Jodi H's tutelage) was torturing demons out of the two youngest.  At what point did Kevin discover the actual extent of what Ruby and Jodi inflicted on those kids? 

Now Ruby's in prison, his four minor children are wards of the state, he's a divorced man on the hook to pay a mega mortgage on the mini mansion in Springville where he's living solo.  

 Should any of the kids ever live with him or should he have supervised visitation? 

[JermajestyDuggar]

3 minutes ago, Howl said:

So about Kevin.  Horrible human? Clueless dad?  Victim of Jodi H?  I'm a strong yes on his vulnerability to Jodi H.

He  spent a year in a small apartment reading his Bible and trying to be a better Mormon man in order to be united with his family, not realizing that in Jodi World, no man can ever be good enough. 

Meanwhile, Ruby (under Jodi H's tutelage) was torturing demons out of the two youngest.  At what point did Kevin discover the actual extent of what Ruby and Jodi inflicted on those kids? 

Now Ruby's in prison, his four minor children are wards of the state, he's a divorced man on the hook to pay a mega mortgage on the mini mansion in Springville where he's living solo.  

 Should any of the kids ever live with him or should he have supervised visitation? 

I personally think it should be a slow transition. They should start out with supervised visits. He needs to take parenting classes and that man needs real therapy. Not Jodi therapy. I do think it would be best if they eventually reunite with their father. I hate to see a family totally broken up by Jodi. Kevin is at fault for many things. But I do hope they can all reunite eventually. 

[clueliss]

Jessica Danielle short with a quote clip from the DA being very specific about the total maximum Jody or Ruby could get in sentencing.

Spoiler

 

 

[Howl]

Kevin is suing Jodi for all the things, and all of her things: 

 

[Katzchen24]

11 minutes ago, Howl said:

Kevin is suing Jodi for all the things, and all of her things: 

He deserves none of the things. The children are the only ones who should be given all the assets of these three human excrescences.

[marmalade]

When is sentencing? I know they're two different dates, but I can't recall how far out they are. 

Edited April 12 by marmalade
Auto fill strikes again!

[Smee]

On 4/3/2024 at 5:52 AM, noseybutt said:

Yup, LDS church would have preferred problematic porn use be included in DSM-5.

As a professional, I have mixed feelings. The DSM is a highly political document that is primarily used in the US to determine insurance/reimbursement. There is a hot mess of lobbying that happens every time a new edition comes out because of the financial (and legal) impact it has. Because it is so political, it is far less scientific than people realize.

The science around this is super complicated. There has been a real shift with substance use disorders away from diagnostic criteria that focuses on physiological addiction (tolerance, withdrawal) and instead focusing on impairment in functioning (social, employment, legal, health). From an impairment perspective, some of the process addictions do function very similarly as substance use disorders. 

The DSM-5 recognized this with gambling. (Politics much? Turns out some states with legalized gambling have taxed it in order to fund treatment.)

While not all porn use is problematic, there are some extreme situations where, for example, users are not able to make it to work consistently due to time invested or they serve long prison sentences for illegal porn possession. That's some serious impairment in functioning! Also, for some the porn might become a fetish, meaning it's needed for arousal and orgasm. And that often causes a different set of issues within relationships.

All this to say, Jodi Hildebrandt was way off the mark when she classified much of human behavior as addictive. All porn use is not an addiction. Neither is sleeping too much, reading or knitting for hours on end, or wanting to spend time with loved ones. Those are all well within the range of normal human behavior.

But I do wish we had better ways of talking about/diagnosing at the extremes. 

I absolutely agree - the way we talk about and define addiction is probably influenced more by politics than by science, and to claim that something is or isn't 'addictive' is a minefield. Remember when 'sugar addiction' was all the rage and people were talking about their diets as 'withdrawal' and citing how sugar elicits a dopamine response in the brain 'just like cocaine!' (just like... literally anything that gives you pleasure)? Now we hear similar about social media addiction. The whole issue of dopamine balance IS a problem, but using the word 'addiction' to describe it feels quite loaded. The idea of pornography addiction or sex addiction is problematic especially when it refers to pretty ordinary pornography consumption, but it also does have a basis in truth in that some people can develop a really unhealthy, dependent relationship with porn and a compulsion to keep viewing more and more extreme stuff even as it has an increasingly negative effect on their lives, relationships and happiness. Same with gambling, or shopping. Like so many things, it's a matter of degree, 'anything is poisonous in the right quantity' and all that.

Mormons abstain from alcohol, right? Do they consider everyone who has an occasional beer to be an alcoholic?

But the other difficult angle is how addiction intersects with other forms of privilege and disadvantage, especially wealth. If addiction is defined in terms of impairment in functioning, then so-called 'high functioning' alcoholics who manage to live off their investments and get ubers to all their social events might be drinking substantially more than someone who lives paycheck to paycheck operating a forklift and gets fired the first time he shows up to work with alcohol still in the system from the previous night.

(sorry for the thread derailment, this is my PhD topic and I am ironically on FJ avoiding writing my thesis right now haha)