Jump to content
IGNORED

Does Josie Duggar appear to have marked cognitive delays?


3 is enough

Recommended Posts

Good grief, the Duggars refuse to vaccinate their children. No way they are getting some type of occupational/speech therapy for one of their kids.

We all know that speech and occupational therapies inevitably involve some type of cells from aborted fetuses, not to mention reciting feminist literature, reading from New International Version of the Bible and learning evolution.

Josie will get all the therapy she needs on the endless visits to the Bates, etc.

:mrgreen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply
In the last episode, where they go to Europe, as they are getting ready to leave there is a baby in a bouncer in the background. It looked like Josie to me, but I can't be sure. IIRC the baby was bouncing and clapping/flapping her arms. It was something you would see from a baby that is 6-10 months old. Does anyone know if that was Josie for sure?

Yes, that was Josie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shouldn't she be talking now? Like at least comprehensible words? At 3, shouldn't she be starting to form sentences?

I visited a friend in September with her son who just turned 2 and he could already say things like "A walk? To the park?".

Of course he was born on time and healthy, but isn't that the norm? Should she at least be communicating basic needs with words now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shouldn't she be talking now? Like at least comprehensible words? At 3, shouldn't she be starting to form sentences?

I visited a friend in September with her son who just turned 2 and he could already say things like "A walk? To the park?".

Of course he was born on time and healthy, but isn't that the norm? Should she at least be communicating basic needs with words now?

The guideline is at least 50 comprehensible words and "starting to put two words together" at age two. My son has a speech therapist and she said that is the goal for typical kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guideline is at least 50 comprehensible words and "starting to put two words together" at age two. My son has a speech therapist and she said that is the goal for typical kids.

By 2 1/2 - 3, Jordyn should be speaking in complete (4+ word) and at least mostly intelligible sentences. Jordyn seems to be stuck on barely stringing two words together, and defaulting to screaming when her meager language skills fail to produce the desired result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are a couple hours from an area I'm very familiar with: A village of about 500 people on the Mississippi River floodplain, the closest attraction a reconstructed fort from the 1600s/1700s -- and most of the village children I've heard speak, there, speak the same way as do most of us who travel through there en route to the history place.

Of course, those children go to public or parochial schools, attend church in a building specifically designated for worship services and interact with other people.

I love listening to different accents and trying to identify where folks are from (Southern USA accents are fascinating in their diversity). Hearing the Arndt boys "tawk wi eash othder an theyre pawrencs behin da cameras" I don't believe there is any accent but the one normally found in Southern Illinois (where the Arndts live), and AFAWK their parents' first language is English. This leaves some kind of family predisposition or hearing impairment.

Mr. Arndt, at least, works as a court reporter or manages a business in court reporting. They've even shown still photos of crossing the Mississippi River to attend legal proceedings as part of their business. And two of the boys appeared on a local TV news show to promote the Fam Team Softball Game, and were perfectly understandable.

But recalling that, there was the uncomfortable video of the grown son with alopecia bouncing up and down in glee as he saw his brothers appear on the huge-screen TV in the Fam Team fam room. I'm guessing hearing impairments as well as what others have guessed: A "Nell"-like dialect and basic social awkwardness that comes from a lifetime of knowing, really, only one way of life. I mean, most young men of Alopecia's age would've fist-pumped or just hollered for the family to come watch. "Alo's" bouncing is like that of a 10- or 11-year-old, max.

I didn't think of a hearing impairment, mostly because of the boys' social awkwardness. There's something odd about their body language as well. Rewatching the above clip and pretending I know nothing about their background (homeschooling, Quiverfull, social isolation, etc.), I would have guessed this was a film about young men who were either autistic or mentally impaired. Their speech, their immature and awkward behavior, and their unfashionable clothing and hairstyles make them look and sound like stereotypical special ed kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way Jim Bob and Michelle have neglected their children is absolutely nothing shy of abuse. The little lost girls probably don't even know they have a mother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard Josie talk to her dad on the q&a show. He asked her to be quiet because he was filming, and she slapped the table, smiled, laughed, and said, "Dada baby talk baby talk".

You should expect her to be delayed in lots of ways, but she'll catch up, if she had no serious lack of oxygen to her brain for any length of time during her birth and afterwards.

My grandson born at 30 weeks and less than 3 lbs. had absolutely no early intervention services--because he didn't need any (although his health as far as colds and such was pretty fragile his first couple of years). He is now 6 and is a math whiz like his father. His brother, full-term, natural home birth weighing 9 lbs., at 30 months, has very few words and is getting speech therapy. I have spent a lot of time with him and he has absolutely no deficits in any other area. In fact, he can pick up an Iphone and find Bob the Builder on Netflix, a process which takes quite a few steps plus the ability to recognize letters, without any help at all. Their youngest brother, also full term, 9 lbs at natural home birth, now 14 months started walking at 9 months and knows sign language and several words already. And he can climb to the top of the refrigerator! ::yikes::

There is a wide, varied range of development for all little kids, and you just can't tell. It doesn't matter in the long run when they learn to walk or talk, so long that they do. Most do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a crucial window with regards to language acquisition, after which it is impossible to ever reach a normal level of speech.

I remember reading about this abuse/neglect case in America of a girl given the pseudonym 'Jeanie'. She was locked in a room all day with minimal stimulation and as a result, even years after she was freed, her speech was incredibly limited. She could string a few words together but never got past the present tense or learned any real grammar, although physically she was able to recover completely. As a result, she ended up in a care home.

Although I appreciate this case is nowhere near as severe, the piece also said that studying children like Jeanie has made scientists think that if a child hasn't learned to speak to a certain level by aged 5, there is a very high chance they will never learn to speak properly. Jenny and Jordyn aren't getting enough one-on-one to stimulate their language acquisition, and it could be setting them up for long term issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that was Josie.

You know, I thought it was Josie at first, too. Then I said to myself that it couldn't be Josie as she's way over the age for being in a bouncy seat. Now, though, I think you're right, JenniferJuniper -it WAS Josie in that bouncer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a crucial window with regards to language acquisition, after which it is impossible to ever reach a normal level of speech.

I remember reading about this abuse/neglect case in America of a girl given the pseudonym 'Jeanie'. She was locked in a room all day with minimal stimulation and as a result, even years after she was freed, her speech was incredibly limited. She could string a few words together but never got past the present tense or learned any real grammar, although physically she was able to recover completely. As a result, she ended up in a care home.

Although I appreciate this case is nowhere near as severe, the piece also said that studying children like Jeanie has made scientists think that if a child hasn't learned to speak to a certain level by aged 5, there is a very high chance they will never learn to speak properly. Jenny and Jordyn aren't getting enough one-on-one to stimulate their language acquisition, and it could be setting them up for long term issues.

This is definitely a very good point, but "Jeanie" also was hit when she made noise, fed baby food, tied up, and kept in the same dark room. Nobody spoke to her or around her, and she wasn't found until she was around 12 or so. Other "feral" (severely neglected to the point of almost being wild) children, not as well known as Jeanie, have recovered - there are a lot of factors but emotional bonds, being found before puberty, therapy after being found, not being severely undernourished, having no obvious diseases or cognitive congenital deficiencies, and not being severely abused (eg, tied up all day in the same position, kept in diapers, fed only baby food or nothing, not being spoken to or hearing any language at all, being beaten for making noise) are all important ones.

Children's ability to learn language is pretty damn impressive. If the lost girls do at least overhear conversation, then they will still be exposed to language hopefully enough to prevent any serious permanent issues. While they'd learn it better if they were spoken to in a conversational manner and given time to babble in response, and while they undoubtedly would benefit from some therapy, I think they're still alright. Or at least, they still have time to catch up. I do worry about Josie though, especially with Michelle being pregnant again. I don't think she's getting any EI and as a micropremie with a possible swallowing disorder she very likely needs it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I thought it was Josie at first, too. Then I said to myself that it couldn't be Josie as she's way over the age for being in a bouncy seat. Now, though, I think you're right, JenniferJuniper -it WAS Josie in that bouncer.

She is over the age that most kids would enjoy a bouncer, even accounting for adjusted age. It wasn't just the bouncer though, it was her movements and facial expressions. I would have guessed her at about 6-8 months old, not based on size, but on development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time will tell. I haven't assessed an infant in a long time and don't usually assess severely handicapped youngsters until they have their triennial at age 6. I've read enough reports from my colleagues though and I know that if a three-year-old is functioning at half his/her chronological age and has concommitent delays in adaptive behavior then the child is diagnosed as having a "intellectual disability". Every state is different and California uses the term intellectual disability and unfortunately does not have eligibility criteria for developmentally delayed like some other states. I've noticed that the preschool assessors are often too timid to label higher functioning 3-year-olds as ID, labelling a speech and language impairment until the child is older. Then very often I have to diagnose an intellectual disability (and bring lots of empathy and Kleenex).

Josie really needs to be in an infant program and the three-year-old (Jordyn?) needs to be evaluated by the local school district immediately. The fact that Josie likes the jumper could be because she needs a lot proprioceptive feedback and could signal a need to OT. The Duggars are fools for having another child and not taking care of the needs of the kids they already have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mom is a physical therapist who works with special needs children. One day, I will get her to watch an episode with me to see what her opinion is. Whenever I tell her details about Josie's development, like that she still needs oxygen, she says, "Oh" with a grim tone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a crucial window with regards to language acquisition, after which it is impossible to ever reach a normal level of speech.

I remember reading about this abuse/neglect case in America of a girl given the pseudonym 'Jeanie'. She was locked in a room all day with minimal stimulation and as a result, even years after she was freed, her speech was incredibly limited. She could string a few words together but never got past the present tense or learned any real grammar, although physically she was able to recover completely. As a result, she ended up in a care home.

Although I appreciate this case is nowhere near as severe, the piece also said that studying children like Jeanie has made scientists think that if a child hasn't learned to speak to a certain level by aged 5, there is a very high chance they will never learn to speak properly. Jenny and Jordyn aren't getting enough one-on-one to stimulate their language acquisition, and it could be setting them up for long term issues.

You are so right on language. The earlier, the better. Why in the heck would any *sane* parent not seek evaluation or speech/ OT help immediately???

You can even a free evaluation from the public schools. Give your child the best chance possible. There's so much you can't control, why not help them with the things you can control??

Oh that's right, we're dealing with the Duggars....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't think of a hearing impairment, mostly because of the boys' social awkwardness. There's something odd about their body language as well. Rewatching the above clip and pretending I know nothing about their background (homeschooling, Quiverfull, social isolation, etc.), I would have guessed this was a film about young men who were either autistic or mentally impaired. Their speech, their immature and awkward behavior, and their unfashionable clothing and hairstyles make them look and sound like stereotypical special ed kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no basis with which to assess Josie's development, but as nutella addict says I don't think there is any basis at all to compare her treatment with that of the "feral child" Genie, whose neglect and abuse at the hands of her insane father and ineffectual mother was absolutely horrific. We can wonder if the youngest Duggars are getting "enough" one-on-one, but Genie was barely permitted to hear human speech. Whole different ballgame. Of course the littlest Js are getting plenty of exposure to language, and of course they are getting far more one-on-one interactions than did Genie.

And even though the evidence that the door of language acquisition closes early is strong, there's room for doubt even in Genie's case: her post-rescue care was repeatedly disrupted, and although she made some pretty astonishing developments in the first few years, she regressed after being shuffled around to different caretakers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree.

I also think that if Josie has problems Jim Bob and Michelle will never admit it. They won't give up on the idea that Josie was god's little miracle just for them and that her problems can't be prayed away.

Agreed. Remember when JimBoob took the kids in to see Josie for the 1st time ever at the hospital? His voice, when he said, "Little Josie is perfect in every way" was... scary. oddly commanding at that point and time and in that place. Not reassuring at all, just like, "here it is, and you WILL believe what I tell you to believe"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it's been found with deaf children that if they don't develop language by a certain age that their language skills will always be limited. So it's not just Jeanie that supports that idea. In the case of the little Js, I would not be shocked to discover that their receptive language is okay, while their expressive language is lagging badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lagging is a whole different ball game than not developing language.

It's a valid question and an interesting discussion, cognitive development in micropreemies and what kind of resources they need. But it's kind of outrageous to compare a well-cared-for child in a lively household to a child who was subjected to a level of social and sensory isolation that we wouldn't allow a death-row prisoner to undergo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The talk about Jeanie reminds me of Dani--the Florida girl who was locked in a room in a filthy diaper with little to no stimulation, until she was found. It's like environmental-induced autism--she loves to be stimulated all the time.

I didn't read the whole thread--but has Josie talked yet? I mean, basic words like baba for a bottle, or something like that?

Regarding the deaf kids assimilating language debate--I was two when I was diagnosed with severe-profound hearing loss. So, two years without language. As many things as my dad did wrong (including abusing me and my brother because of deafness on occasion), he and my mom did do intensive therapy with me. Most people don't even know I'm hearing impaired at all if I wear my hair down, and the very perceptive people think I have a ever so tiny German accent or something.

I really really hope that Josie can eventually get intense therapy for her developmental lag...even at the very least pair her up with an older kid, and have her be the only buddy to the older kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She is over the age that most kids would enjoy a bouncer, even accounting for adjusted age. It wasn't just the bouncer though, it was her movements and facial expressions. I would have guessed her at about 6-8 months old, not based on size, but on development.

I remember seeing Jordyn and possibly Jennifer both in the jumparoo way past the age that my son gave it up. We stopped using it around nine months I think? Definately had it put away by a year. I've seen Duggar toddlers in it before that were well past a year and possibly past two years. I guess those older buddies need a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard Josie talk to her dad on the q&a show. He asked her to be quiet because he was filming, and she slapped the table, smiled, laughed, and said, "Dada baby talk baby talk".

That just made me sad. He should have babbled back to her. I would have scooped that baby up and done the interview with her on my lap. And she is WAY too old to be in a jumper.

Good pickup on Jordyn. It stuns me that she's almost 3. Wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the deaf kids assimilating language debate--I was two when I was diagnosed with severe-profound hearing loss. So, two years without language. As many things as my dad did wrong (including abusing me and my brother because of deafness on occasion), he and my mom did do intensive therapy with me. Most people don't even know I'm hearing impaired at all if I wear my hair down, and the very perceptive people think I have a ever so tiny German accent or something.

I was thinking more of examples of kids who were not ID'd until much older. It's much less common now, but my dad knew of a pair of twin who were believed to be profoundly intellectually disabled until their mid-teens, when it was discovered they were actually deaf.

Of course, more extreme examples like these and Genie don't have direct bearing on the Duggar kids, but it does give insight he over all issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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