Michaela & Brandon 6: She Is an LPN and He Is Boring.....

[Keys]

3 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

I see what you are saying but I would argue that they have much better access to therapy and medicine. They have many more choices and options to deal with their trauma and mental health. Which is huge. And if their mental health effects them so greatly that they are unable to work, they won’t be thrown out of their home for not being able to pay their rent and end up on the streets. Or in jail for doing something illegal. Because they can afford all the best lawyers. It’s just a fact in the US that you have a problem, you have many more options to fix that problem when you are rich. 

I definitely see where you’re coming from! I guess my question is, can therapy and all the things money can buy really “fix” everything? Like hey you never had an emotional attachment with your parents, for example. It’s a cascade of effects from that. I mean we see so many celebrities dealing with addictions, mental health crises, suicide or early death etc. I think money buys a lot of things and makes people better off in soooo many ways, but I also think it’s not a replacement for having real, meaningful relationships and healthy attachment with your parents. We aren’t meant to be robots. And ultimately, I would also argue that babies and kids value that attachment and connection way more than their $2000 bassinet or expensive Montessori toys and brand name clothes etc.  

Edited February 16, 2023 by Keys

[Mrs Ms]

Chances are rich kids will be fed, clothed and sheltered adequately with any abuse. Poor kids will potentially have insecurities in all three of those areas with any abuse. Abuse is the absolute same no matter the income level. Other factors don’t change that, just give the victim extra challenges. 

[JermajestyDuggar]

7 hours ago, Keys said:

I definitely see where you’re coming from! I guess my question is, can therapy and all the things money can buy really “fix” everything? Like hey you never had an emotional attachment with your parents, for example. It’s a cascade of effects from that. I mean we see so many celebrities dealing with addictions, mental health crises, suicide or early death etc. I think money buys a lot of things and makes people better off in soooo many ways, but I also think it’s not a replacement for having real, meaningful relationships and healthy attachment with your parents. We aren’t meant to be robots. And ultimately, I would also argue that babies and kids value that attachment and connection way more than their $2000 bassinet or expensive Montessori toys and brand name clothes etc.  

I don’t believe that therapy and medicine can fix everything. But studies show it absolutely can help. That’s a fact. And poor people have much less access to those things since america seems to want to monetize everything. Including mental health and medicine. And the rich do have safety nets. So they are much less likely to end up in jail or living on the street when their addictions get much more severe. The point is, abuse of everywhere. It harms people at any income level. Again, you have many more options to deal with abuse, addictions, etc when you are rich. Thanks to how america is set up. And when you are able to deal with those things, you can possibly break the cycle. And not do the same thing to your children. So like Paris for example. I imagine she will at least try to break the cycle with her own children. I doubt she will repeat a lot of the mistakes her mother and father made because she was able to recognize the problems and take steps to make those changes in her own parenting. Or she could totally suck as a parent. Who knows. But she had those options that millions of other Americans didn’t have. 
 

On FJ, a lot of the quiverful problems we talk about are due to poverty. Having 12 children is just not possible in the US because most jobs just can’t support that big of a family. Most jobs are under paid in the US to be honest. And there are jobs where you couldn’t even support one kid working full time let alone 12. There are plenty of quiverful kids who have grown up and talked about how food was scarce and they went hungry in their childhood. They didn’t get any sort of extra curricular activities because their parents couldn’t afford it. They rarely got to take any trips at all because their parents couldn’t afford it. There are so many problems in America based on the fact that some people no matter how hard they work, can’t make enough money for their family. That’s probably why these huge families irk me so much. They are choosing poverty when there are so many people out there who are just born into it and try so hard to get out of it. Why would you choose to never use birth control when you know your paycheck could never afford all of these kids? Is that really what god would want for you? For your kids to go hungry? 

Edited February 16, 2023 by JermajestyDuggar

[Jackie3]

On 2/16/2023 at 4:38 AM, JermajestyDuggar said:

Again, you have many more options to deal with abuse, addictions, etc when you are rich.

Wen you are a rich abuser, you have many ways to hide from the law. You  have lots of ways to protect yourself from the police and social services. Abused children are in great danger in these homes, because of their parents' privilege and power.

You may think these kids have it better because they live in fancy homes.  That just means you are overvaluing the value of a fancy home.

When you are a four-year old being r*ped, or a 10-year old being burned by cigarettes, fancy homes don't mean much at all. 

 

On 2/16/2023 at 4:38 AM, JermajestyDuggar said:

Most jobs are under paid in the US to be honest.

What does this even mean? Underpaid compared to what? What a generalized, unsupported statement.

Is there a standard pay for, say, a computer engineer or a landscaper? And these jobs are paid beneath that standard? 

Jobs pay what the market will bear. Period. 

 

[Shouldabeenacowboy]

On 2/15/2023 at 8:30 PM, JermajestyDuggar said:

I see what you are saying but I would argue that they have much better access to therapy and medicine. They have many more choices and options to deal with their trauma and mental health. Which is huge. And if their mental health effects them so greatly that they are unable to work, they won’t be thrown out of their home for not being able to pay their rent and end up on the streets. Or in jail for doing something illegal. Because they can afford all the best lawyers. It’s just a fact in the US that you have a problem, you have many more options to fix that problem when you are rich. 

You are making the huge assumption, in my opinion, that kids from wealthy families have access to their family wealth. In many instances, not the case. In fact, financial abuse can hide and compound many other types of abuses in so-called "well off" families. Maybe they do not make the news or the statistics, but they are out there. 

[backyard sylph]

#Notallrichpeople I guess. 

Maybe it takes having been truly poor to understand the difference between that and...everything else. Funny, though, I can always imagine having been even poorer, even more uncertain and unsafe, though not, perhaps, quite in the moment.  

[JermajestyDuggar]

On 2/21/2023 at 4:54 PM, backyard sylph said:

#Notallrichpeople I guess. 

Maybe it takes having been truly poor to understand the difference between that and...everything else. Funny, though, I can always imagine having been even poorer, even more uncertain and unsafe, though not, perhaps, quite in the moment.  

I think my mom drilled it into my head that I was very lucky financially growing up. Even though she was a single mom and my family often lived paycheck to paycheck. But she was a totally underpaid social worker in the middle of nowhere USA. So she would constantly tell me that her clients sometimes didn’t have beds, heat, electricity, etc and I better thank my lucky stars I had those things. 

[Jackie3]

On 2/21/2023 at 1:54 PM, backyard sylph said:

Maybe it takes having been truly poor to understand the difference between that and...everything else.

Maybe it takes being punched in the face by your parent to realize that it doesn't matter what type of roof you are living under.

Take a look at the Valva case. Father killed his 8 year old son. No, sorry, he tortured him to death. They lived in a nice middle class home. I'll bet Tommy would have loved to be in a ghetto with a loving father.

Which would you pick? Fancy home with abusive parent? Poor home with loving parents? I know what I'd choose.

I've worked with kids from the projects who are quite happy and secure because their family loves them. They don't even know they are poor, actually. 

Edited February 24, 2023 by Jackie3

[dawbs]

There is that infuriating trope of the 'we had no money, but we had so much love'.
I understand why the trope exists.

But I also know it can be bullshit at least as often as it can be reality. My mom's PTSD stems from her childhood. Where she was one of 5 kids in a family that couldn't afford any kids.  There was a plan, at one point, for the kids to be sent to live with better-off relatives--to the point where the kids were in the respective cars to 'visit' the new families.  And then the relatives learned that my grandmother hadn't really given consent, so the kids were all sent back home. Where they dealt with abuse and neglect.  Sure, it would be swell if they had been choosing between loved & poor or abused while rich. But they were choosing between being despised/abused while poor rather than cherished while 'comfortable.

(On the other hand, WTF to the relatives as well, They were aunts and uncles who were infertile, wanted kids of their own, and made moves to take in these 'poor relations'. When they couldn't do that, they didn't manage to 'help' these kids in any way--they basically washed their hands of them and sent them home to be hungry.  Feels very fundie 'I'll adopt and indoctrinate your kid, but I won't give a dime to help your pagan family"

[KWLand]

I didn’t expect this type of argument to be on free jinger.  Call me naive but I thought this forum discussed the impact abuse and neglect has on these families and we know some are well off and some aren’t.

I do think there is merit in discussing the resources for that abuse and neglect and the pros and cons have having access to resource.  Also if abuse and neglect is more likely to be identified in different working classes or families based on their finances or access to resources. 

I grew up with foster siblings.  Neglect, abuse, whatever caused them to be in the system didn’t care if they were rich or poor.  Yeah treatment and intervention wise it’s probably easier for those with access to resources, but nobody will ever be able to convince me that the impact of abuse cares if someone is rich or poor or has resources.

last I looked, and it’s been a while since I looked, stats show that minority children from lower class families end up in the foster care system more often.  There was an ad campaign for SIDS that was aimed at lower class minorities.  Since stats for abuse and neglect are often taken from the system it’s hard to see if abuse and neglect is equal across all races and classes.  I’d guess it would be.

one of the big problems is no one seems to agree on the definition of neglect and abuse.  It’s not hard to see the Pearls were abusive but the definition of the court system doesn’t agree.  So the rich white man labels it biblical discipline and sells books.  It’s gross

[rebeccawriter01]

On 2/16/2023 at 4:38 AM, JermajestyDuggar said:

On FJ, a lot of the quiverful problems we talk about are due to poverty. Having 12 children is just not possible in the US because most jobs just can’t support that big of a family. Most jobs are under paid in the US to be honest. And there are jobs where you couldn’t even support one kid working full time let alone 12. There are plenty of quiverful kids who have grown up and talked about how food was scarce and they went hungry in their childhood. They didn’t get any sort of extra curricular activities because their parents couldn’t afford it. They rarely got to take any trips at all because their parents couldn’t afford it. There are so many problems in America based on the fact that some people no matter how hard they work, can’t make enough money for their family. That’s probably why these huge families irk me so much. They are choosing poverty when there are so many people out there who are just born into it and try so hard to get out of it. Why would you choose to never use birth control when you know your paycheck could never afford all of these kids? Is that really what god would want for you? For your kids to go hungry? 

Unfortunately, groups like IBLP prey on those in poverty. The financial seminars that promise financial independence still pull people (like Gil) into the clutches. Meanwhile they are simply taught to bury themselves deeper into poverty by having more children and not working in a job where they might be influenced badly by a heathen.

[SassyPants]

2 hours ago, rebeccawriter01 said:

Unfortunately, groups like IBLP prey on those in poverty. The financial seminars that promise financial independence still pull people (like Gil) into the clutches. Meanwhile they are simply taught to bury themselves deeper into poverty by having more children and not working in a job where they might be influenced badly by a heathen.

It’s classic brainwashing-

[HereticHick]

In case you missed it--Michael on an Insta post confirmed that she isn't working for pay. I'm not going to say she doesn't work, because she does have her baby stuff that she makes and sells. I'm glad that she is doing volunteer work, and I hope it is the healthcare field. But I do think that it is a real shame that we have nursing shortage in this country & Michael won't even go get a part time job :

[SassyPants]

I think M. Is a licensed vocational nurse (LVN). In the past, LVNs were not as employable as RNs because that license has limitations on how the nurse can function. Maybe, since Covid, things have changed. Often times doctor’s offices will use LVNs as the responsibilities involved and treatments needed are not as acute or critical; involve fewer skills that require less practice.

Either way, I think it’s odd for a person to spend the time and money to attend school and obtain a license and never actually practice. 

[JDuggs]

I don’t really think it’s that strange that Michael isn’t working. I always thought that her nursing education was just killing time while trying to get pregnant. I think her education and license/certification was more about a personal accomplishment than a step towards a career. I don’t think fundies, especially fundy women, want to be tied down to a work schedule. If they don’t need the money, not working, or only volunteering, seem like legitimate choices.

[JermajestyDuggar]

What I hope is that her volunteer work has nothing to do with abortion. I hope she actually helps people and enjoys volunteering. 

[HermioneSparrow]

46 minutes ago, SassyPants said:

I think M. Is a licensed vocational nurse (LVN). In the past, LVNs were not as employable as RNs because that license has limitations on how the nurse can function. Maybe, since Covid, things have changed. Often times doctor’s offices will use LVNs as the responsibilities involved and treatments needed are not as acute or critical; involve fewer skills that require less practice.

Either way, I think it’s odd for a person to spend the time and money to attend school and obtain a license and never actually practice. 

She's a LPN. Not sure if it's basically the same.

[HereticHick]

1 hour ago, JDuggs said:

 I don’t think fundies, especially fundy women, want to be tied down to a work schedule. If they don’t need the money, not working, or only volunteering, seem like legitimate choices.

I don't understand why none of these fundies ever worry about saving for their old age (much less medical needs). There is no guarantee that Social Security is going to be around in 40 years.

[Coconut Flan]

Carry on here: