Jump to content
IGNORED

Michael and Brandon 7: Lying Low in Batesville


Coconut Flan

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

The fact that they still rent makes me think that maybe they bought into the fundie mindset of all debt is bad. Even a mortgage.

Does Brandon even have a real job? Is he still somehow working remotely for IBLP? I would guess the reason they don’t own a home is because they can’t afford to buy one. His brother RJ has the appearance of a very successful mortgage broker, so it would be kind of ironic, but not unsurprising, if Brandon is clinging to the notion that mortgages are bad.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they are banking cash for adoption. I have no insider knowledge. That is what I think they are doing with their YouTube income though. Michael's recent video about Papa Bill and Jane was very sweet. 

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Wondering how the SBC anti-IVF stance is potentially affecting Michael and Brandon. It seems like they’ve always been anti-IVF anyway, but I wonder if this will discourage it for them even more, or possibly encourage them to adopt embryos instead so they can rescue all those poor frozen children?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Johannah said:

Wondering how the SBC anti-IVF stance is potentially affecting Michael and Brandon. It seems like they’ve always been anti-IVF anyway, but I wonder if this will discourage it for them even more, or possibly encourage them to adopt embryos instead so they can rescue all those poor frozen children?

I’ve never had to deal with infertility, so I haven’t pondered the choices too much personally. However, if I had frozen embryos, I’m pretty sure I’d rather them remain frozen instead of someone else raising my biological children. I think that concept would be hard to bear.

  • Upvote 5
  • Confused 1
  • I Agree 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Johannah said:

Wondering how the SBC anti-IVF stance is potentially affecting Michael and Brandon. It seems like they’ve always been anti-IVF anyway, but I wonder if this will discourage it for them even more, or possibly encourage them to adopt embryos instead so they can rescue all those poor frozen children?

I thought Michael at one point @ least hinted that IVF wasn’t an option for her due to medical issues. So many of the Bates daughters have a pregnancy related clotting disorder, I assumed Michael likely did as well which would rule IVF out 🤷‍♂️.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sndral said:

I thought Michael at one point @ least hinted that IVF wasn’t an option for her due to medical issues. So many of the Bates daughters have a pregnancy related clotting disorder, I assumed Michael likely did as well which would rule IVF out 🤷‍♂️.

Yes she said that at one point.  If you go back and read this thread and the past two threads, it's mentioned somewhere in there. 

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m just not sure how IVF would be an issue with a blood clotting disorder, but pregnancy wouldn’t (which she is actively trying to achieve, and did achieve, but miscarried). 
 

And if for some reason doing an egg retrieval is an issue, that still wouldn’t preclude doing a transfer for embryo donation/adoption, which is about as invasive as natural conception. 
 

I think Michael’s opposition to IVF has been “theological,” and her adoption views (whether baby or embryo) might be skewed by nutty Gothard thinking, but I’m wondering if that might change with this SBC statement. Apparently they’re now actively encouraging Christians to adopt embryos to save all those unborn babies. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Rufus Bless 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Johannah said:

I’m just not sure how IVF would be an issue with a blood clotting disorder, but pregnancy wouldn’t (which she is actively trying to achieve, and did achieve, but miscarried). 
 

And if for some reason doing an egg retrieval is an issue, that still wouldn’t preclude doing a transfer for embryo donation/adoption, which is about as invasive as natural conception. 
 

I think Michael’s opposition to IVF has been “theological,” and her adoption views (whether baby or embryo) might be skewed by nutty Gothard thinking, but I’m wondering if that might change with this SBC statement. Apparently they’re now actively encouraging Christians to adopt embryos to save all those unborn babies. 

Michael has multiple blood clotting disorders plus some things she hasn't disclosed. IVF increases risk of blood clots and they're might be other risks associated so I don't think it's an option for her and she has said this a few times both in youtube and instagram q&a's.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/18/2024 at 6:13 PM, Johannah said:

Wondering how the SBC anti-IVF stance is potentially affecting Michael and Brandon. It seems like they’ve always been anti-IVF anyway, but I wonder if this will discourage it for them even more, or possibly encourage them to adopt embryos instead so they can rescue all those poor frozen children?

They are not Southern Baptist so why would it impact them at all?

  • Upvote 1
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

They are not Southern Baptist so why would it impact them at all?

They attend an IFB church which tends to follow Southern Baptist logic but takes it up a notch or two. I can't think of many examples where IFB is less strict than Southern Baptist.

  • Upvote 2
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2024 at 6:35 AM, Johannah said:

I’m just not sure how IVF would be an issue with a blood clotting disorder, but pregnancy wouldn’t (which she is actively trying to achieve, and did achieve, but miscarried). 
 

And if for some reason doing an egg retrieval is an issue, that still wouldn’t preclude doing a transfer for embryo donation/adoption, which is about as invasive as natural conception. 
 

I think Michael’s opposition to IVF has been “theological,” and her adoption views (whether baby or embryo) might be skewed by nutty Gothard thinking, but I’m wondering if that might change with this SBC statement. Apparently they’re now actively encouraging Christians to adopt embryos to save all those unborn babies. 

IVF needs hormones, but taking hormones is risky for Michael, due to her clotting disorder. I doubt she can do an embryo transfer without previous hormone treatment... The body must be ready to sustain a pregnancy and not all bodies are ready for that without medical help/hormones/other drugs. An embryo transfer is not the same than a natural conception (which is also extremely difficult for Michael). If it was the same, women in IVF wouldn't be highly monitored until doctors find the perfect time to do the transfer.

IVF is not as succesful as many people think and it has a bunch of risks. Michael may refuse IVF or embryo donation for religious beliefs, but there may be other reasons, like protecting her health.

 

 

  • Upvote 7
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just got sucked into another Michael and Brandon YouTube video. They went to Maine last summer for Brandon’s parents’ 50th anniversary with Brandon's entire family. I’m planning a trip to Maine in August which is why I watched it. I’ve got to say, Michael and Brandon are both very likable. Both of them are articulate and interesting. Such a different vibe from any of her siblings. 

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 1
  • Thank You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JDuggs said:

I just got sucked into another Michael and Brandon YouTube video. They went to Maine last summer for Brandon’s parents’ 50th anniversary with Brandon's entire family. I’m planning a trip to Maine in August which is why I watched it. I’ve got to say, Michael and Brandon are both very likable. Both of them are articulate and interesting. Such a different vibe from any of her siblings. 

Ooooh, have a great trip to Maine! I was born there and spent most of my childhood in southern Maine/New Hampshire. August is a perfect time to visit.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been a Southern Baptist all my life and haven't heard of anti-IVF.  SBC doesn't have a governing board; they have a convention every year when pastors come together to vote on various motions but each church is an entity to itself.  Our pastor just got back from this year's.  He told us before he left that there would be certain specific headlines that we could assume ahead of time weren't true.

My step-daughter and her husband tried IVF once but weren't successful so they were able to adopt.  Her husband's parents were so totally Baptist that when the parents joined the newlyweds on the dance floor he had to command them to get up and just sway in place if that's all they would do.

Edited by SoSoNosy
  • Bless Your Heart 1
  • Rufus Bless 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A pic posted of the Keilen family:

68D8F99A-DB86-4612-B37E-0C6CC11374F4.jpeg

I still think it’s fascinating that a couple with 10 kids have very few grandkids.

  • Upvote 6
  • I Agree 2
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had forgotten Mrs. Keilen's hair.  I see she hasn't changed it much.

  • Upvote 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

I had forgotten Mrs. Keilen's hair.  I see she hasn't changed it much.

The daughter with the baby bangs is about a million times worse. 

Edited by JermajestyDuggar
  • Upvote 3
  • Haha 2
  • I Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2024 at 4:56 PM, Melissa1977 said:

IVF needs hormones, but taking hormones is risky for Michael, due to her clotting disorder. I doubt she can do an embryo transfer without previous hormone treatment... The body must be ready to sustain a pregnancy and not all bodies are ready for that without medical help/hormones/other drugs. An embryo transfer is not the same than a natural conception (which is also extremely difficult for Michael). If it was the same, women in IVF wouldn't be highly monitored until doctors find the perfect time to do the transfer.

IVF is not as succesful as many people think and it has a bunch of risks. Michael may refuse IVF or embryo donation for religious beliefs, but there may be other reasons, like protecting her health.

 

 

Embryo adoption requires a ton of hormones. Three months on oral contraceptives to get your cycle where they want it, three weeks of lupron injections to shut down your cycle then injected and topic progesterone for three weeks prior to the transfer and up to 13 weeks of pregnancy. My blood pressure was through the roof with the first baby (the one I lost) and then stayed relatively stable with my second attempt (currently 4.5 years and asleep in my bed as I type this). With her clotting disorder, this may be way too risky. 

  • Upvote 7
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Expectopatronus said:

Embryo adoption requires a ton of hormones. Three months on oral contraceptives to get your cycle where they want it, three weeks of lupron injections to shut down your cycle then injected and topic progesterone for three weeks prior to the transfer and up to 13 weeks of pregnancy. My blood pressure was through the roof with the first baby (the one I lost) and then stayed relatively stable with my second attempt (currently 4.5 years and asleep in my bed as I type this). With her clotting disorder, this may be way too risky. 

I don't want to sound mean, but I suspect that behind all that embryo adoption trend there are non-ethical economic goals. Christian women are convinced to *adopt* an embryo and they need to spend a lot of money in healthcare and get health risks... And probably miscarry, in many cases, because implantation is not easy. Meanwhile, someone is getting rich. Of course, some people will get their baby and be happy, of course! But the overall embryo adoption is not just a pro-life candid idea.

  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Expectopatronus said:

Embryo adoption requires a ton of hormones. Three months on oral contraceptives to get your cycle where they want it, three weeks of lupron injections to shut down your cycle then injected and topic progesterone for three weeks prior to the transfer and up to 13 weeks of pregnancy. My blood pressure was through the roof with the first baby (the one I lost) and then stayed relatively stable with my second attempt (currently 4.5 years and asleep in my bed as I type this). With her clotting disorder, this may be way too risky. 

I am about to undergo my 5th embryo transfer. I also did an egg retrieval, which definitely does require hormones (although there is a protocol to do a single natural cycle egg retrieval without any hormones), but an embryo transfer often does not. It is not always required to use birth control or lupron. I have never taken either one, for my retrieval or transfers. 
 

Many clinics do medicated transfer cycles (mostly involving progesterone) in order to control the timing and make it more convenient for themselves. I have always requested to do natural cycles, which involves monitoring (a transvaginal ultrasound for a few days - no meds), to make sure they know when you ovulate. 5 days after ovulation I go in to have the embryo inserted and then go home and wait to see if it takes. 
 

We don’t know Michael’s entire health history, but I just think there’s a likelihood that there is possible moral opposition to IVF in addition to her medical issues (which could potentially be worked around, at least for an embryo transfer). The recent SBC convention news just made me think about it more and guess that Michael is probably opposed to IVF in general. I was also intrigued by the SBC embryo adoption encouragement and wondered about her views on that.
 

I work in a healthcare field, my spouse is a physician, and IVF/reproductive health (along with fundies) also just happens to be a special interest of mine, even before I had to go through it myself. 

  • Love 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

I had forgotten Mrs. Keilen's hair.  I see she hasn't changed it much.

I feel like it somehow defies every law of physics and ruptures the space-time continuum. It's terrible in a way I can't even describe because I don't know where it begins and where it ends and all I feel is a creeping existential dread akin to reading HP Lovecraft.

  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The second from the left in the standing row looks like she has Cabbage Patch hair or doll hair or something. Is that the editing or my eyes or ????

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, gobucks said:

The second from the left in the standing row looks like she has Cabbage Patch hair or doll hair or something. Is that the editing or my eyes or ????

She’s always had baby bangs. And I’ve always had an extreme aversion to all baby bangs no matter the person. I just don’t get the appeal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's her name? Does she have social media? I gotta see more of this. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

The daughter with the baby bangs is about a million times worse. 

Those are BANGS? Holy shit. I can't even.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
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.