Razing Ruth's niece adopted by same sex couple

[Daenerys]

Legal Eagle Jingerites: is it really possible that Ruth could be sued for revealing her identity, and hence those of her family?

[formergothardite]

If she is tired of being called a liar then she can just stop blogging anonymously or stop blogging period. The solution to that problem in her life is fairly simple.

My take is that eventually someone will figure out who she is and tell the world.

[Daenerys]

If she is tired of being called a liar then she can just stop blogging anonymously or stop blogging period. The solution to that problem in her life is fairly simple.

My take is that eventually someone will figure out who she is and tell the world.

The baby sibling is such a huge giveaway to those in the right circles I'm surprised it hasn't happened already...

[Alana Rickman]

Legal Eagle Jingerites: is it really possible that Ruth could be sued for revealing her identity, and hence those of her family?

Doesn't Ruth live in a different state than her family? If so, then unless they're willing to go to where she is to file a lawsuit, her family would probably have a hard time getting jurisdiction over her to sue her for anything at all.

[formergothardite]

What exactly could they sue her for?

[Daenerys]

What exactly could they sue her for?

Defamation of some sort, since she has claimed abuse at the hands of her parents. I'm just not sure if you could do this because of a small-time internet blog?

Her blog gives the impression that she lives in California and her family in Arkansas.

[B5SnowDog]

If she's telling the truth, then it's not defamation of character.

[Deleted03]

If she's telling the truth, then it's not defamation of character.

wouldn't you need to establish that through a trial though? I thought she did not want to go through a trial or whatnot.

I would be sick of discussions going on for a week about if I'm telling the truth or not. But again I don't have a blog either. She can't vent on her own blog, she can't vent here... I kinda feel it's just an uneasy situation. It's easier to say get over it than to actually experience it too.

[Beeks]

wouldn't you need to establish that through a trial though? I thought she did not want to go through a trial or whatnot.

I would be sick of discussions going on for a week about if I'm telling the truth or not. But again I don't have a blog either. She can't vent on her own blog, she can't vent here... I kinda feel it's just an uneasy situation. It's easier to say get over it than to actually experience it too.

Whoever files the suit has the burden of proof....if they can't show enough evidence of defamation in the complaint it will just be tossed without a trial. Her assertion that she could be sued if she reveals her identity is ridiculous, imo.

[polabear]

Whoever files the suit has the burden of proof....if they can't show enough evidence of defamation in the complaint it will just be tossed without a trial. Her assertion that she could be sued if she reveals her identity is ridiculous, imo.

In the US, people can sue for anything. However, the standards for defamation and libel are very high. The person bringing the suit has to prove that the allegations were not true. In Britian, the standard is the other way around - the person being sued has to prove what they said was true.

I was accused on another forum of being fake - or at least, inventing other personalities. It was completely not true, and I spent WAY too long trying to convince people that really, I wasn't lying. I eventually gave up. But its odd, how piercing an accusation of "you are fake!" is.

[ceg045]

wouldn't you need to establish that through a trial though? I thought she did not want to go through a trial or whatnot.

I would be sick of discussions going on for a week about if I'm telling the truth or not. But again I don't have a blog either. She can't vent on her own blog, she can't vent here... I kinda feel it's just an uneasy situation. It's easier to say get over it than to actually experience it too.

She can certainly vent on her own blog. Heck, she can come here and vent, too. No one's stopping her. But by venting publicly, be it on her blog or on FJ, she's putting herself out there for criticism, just like the Duggars or anyone else. If she wants to vent to a closed audience, there are many options available: talking to a IRL or internet friend privately, making her blog password-protected, keeping a journal, talking to a counselor, etc. It's natural to feel frustration if you're telling the truth and people aren't believing you, but if you make the decision to blog anonymously, that's the risk you run.

[Guest Anonymous]

I don't recall Ruth being afraid of lawsuits from her family; I thought the area she was challenged on legally was using the 49 Gothard Character Qualities as blog post headings (which she gave in to).

I think she has said several times that the anonymity issues are at least in part due to there being minor siblings at home, whose safety/care might be compromised by a public broohaha over her story.

[B5SnowDog]

She can't vent on her own blog, she can't vent here... I kinda feel it's just an uneasy situation. It's easier to say get over it than to actually experience it too.

No one is stopping her from venting. If she doesn't want to read negative comments, she can change her blog so that no one can comment on it and stop coming here. Any time you put something out on the internet, someone somewhere is going to say something negative. If she can't handle that, she should go private.

[Deleted03]

I don't recall Ruth being afraid of lawsuits from her family; I thought the area she was challenged on legally was using the 49 Gothard Character Qualities as blog post headings (which she gave in to).

I think she has said several times that the anonymity issues are at least in part due to there being minor siblings at home, whose safety/care might be compromised by a public broohaha over her story.

I thought that's what daddy threatened her with some time ago on her blog.... I think it was the one time he used her middle name, I might be wrong there though

[luckylibrarian]

She just posted again in response to some of the comments here. She isn't worried about lawsuits. Her family's livelihood depends on ATI. She doesn't want her siblings to suffer because she left, though it sounds like they already are. With Rachel gone now, I imagine it will only get worse.

[formergothardite]

I haven't really read her blog, but if there is abuse, then she isn't helping anyone if she covers it up. One of the big problems in ATI is that the abusive families that worked for Gothard were kept secret. If everything she has said is true, then I'm sure Gothard can read her blog and figure out which family it is anyway. Forcing him to deal with the abuse in his cult would be a good thing. And if her dad refuses to look for another job or let his family get help from the government and her younger siblings go without basic needs, then she can call CPS and get the family investigated.

[spragger]

I don't want to give her more excuses, but there is more to it than just that. Any employee looking to hire her when she gets out of college could google her name and find blog. Maybe it's as simple as that. Maybe she wants to blog, but not want to admit she is former ATI, or let her former employer know all those crazy details about her life. That's fine, but she's got to deal with people questioning the validity of her story.

I was thinking about it last night and trying to pin down why it would even matter if a person or person presented this "Ruth" persona, as real, Like people are saying, if you have not donated any money, why does it matter? I think it is this idea of "Munchhausen by Internet." Only, not a medical condition. I mean, think of the comments Ruth would be getting on her blog if it were presented as fiction (and you donated to keep the story going). They would be comments on her talents as a writer, etc. No sympathy, etc. It's just very insulting to real victims of abuse, I think. I'm not former ATI, but I was in a "coercive religious group."

At the same time, if what Ruth says IS true, I fully support her decision to stay anonymous. If it were me,

[formergothardite]

It doesn't really matter if there aren't children in an abusive home. If her parents are abusive and there are still children in the home then it does matter, IMO. But like I said, I haven't really read the blog so I don't know if it is an abusive home. Why would Gothard fire her dad if it comes out it is him? There are plenty of families in ATI that have children who left the flock. Having a rebellious daughter or two isn't enough to get you kicked out of ATI.

[luckylibrarian]

I think I remember reading that her family runs an ATI-approved home business, and their primary customers are fellow ATIers. Having a rebellious daughter (and now two rebellious daughters) impacts the family business by driving customers away. Either way, it seems like most ATIers know who Ruth is or at least have a suspicion.

I can understand the fear of Google, but unless the potential employer is affiliated with ATI, I can't see an employer looking down on her. Her parents' religious beliefs were not her choice. She is a victim. If she still is considering becoming a librarian, she couldn't choose a more liberal, anti-Gothard profession.

[Guest Anonymous]

I can understand the fear of Google, but unless the potential employer is affiliated with ATI, I can't see an employer looking down on her. Her parents' religious beliefs were not her choice. She is a victim. If she still is considering becoming a librarian, she couldn't choose a more liberal, anti-Gothard profession.

Employers are human though, and will likely make the same range of judgements that she gets on her blog.

[holierthanyou]

The (impractical) conspiracy theorist in me gets a kick out of imagining that Razing Ruth is really Jana Duggar... and now Jessa is getting to come live with her because some asshole "journeyed to her heart" resulting in the need for an adoption plan. Ah well, a girl can (day)dream... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Deleted03]

It doesn't really matter if there aren't children in an abusive home. If her parents are abusive and there are still children in the home then it does matter, IMO. But like I said, I haven't really read the blog so I don't know if it is an abusive home. Why would Gothard fire her dad if it comes out it is him? There are plenty of families in ATI that have children who left the flock. Having a rebellious daughter or two isn't enough to get you kicked out of ATI.

well she would not need to give up her anonymity as much as placing a call with CPS...

[Little Miss Alien]

Well, maybe not fired, but ter eis a certain element of 'shaming' going on from all angles, isn't there? If Darth Daddy has had 3 children leave the cult (out of how many is it? I'm thinking 7 or 8 but not sure why) then he could, theoretically, be held up as not being a godly enough man, a weak spiritual leader and head of household etc. He might not necessarily lose his job, but things could be made difficult for him, or he might lose certain privileges within the cult that allow him a fairly good standard of living. Remember how desperate this whole operation is to look good and only good, paragons of virtue and godly living etc. What would a prominent member having 3 children leave say about his leadership? If he's not godly enough, maybe he's not suitable for the job after all.

In the real world, family problems such as these would have little bearing on a job, providing it didn't affect their ability to do their job etc. But this is the world of ATI, where we already know their logic is fucked up and appearance is everything.

We also don't know what emails Ruth is getting. If her father is using her siblings as pawns - ie. If you do X, I'll do Y/Z will happen, then Ruth is going to comply with him to protect them. And he KNOWS this. He is a classic abuser, and he is still in control, albeit in a very distant way.

I know that I personally, would do anything to protect my little sister, and if someone told me that my actions could result in her not eating, or losing a roof over her head I would comply with their wishes, no matter what.

It really is that hard to break free from abuse, and I believe that Ruth is not entirely free yet. I believe that her reaction to comments about her lying or faking may be somewhat related to things her Dad has said to her. He has publicly accused her of lying on her blog too. For someone who has been so terribly abused, it can be so hard to separate comments from others from comments from the abuser. ie. if an abuser was always telling someone "You're fat" and then at work a co-worker comments on what you're eating, "You're eating that!" it's an easy jump for the victim to make to think that other people think the same way as the abuser and that the truth is they really are fat. What I'm trying to say is, in Ruth's mind, it may be that her Dad has sent her so many emails about her 'lies' that as soon as someone doubts her veracity she translates that in her mind to "They think I'm lying too!"

I also thought her post yesterday was her finally snapping, not whining "No one belieeeeeves me!" I found it to be human. I admired her control though - she did not resort to name calling, she did not try and prove herself in any other way. She vented her frustrations, even at the same time as acknowledging that others were indeed free to doubt her. She was simply frustrated by it. As far as internet tantrums or flounces I've seen (or even done myself over a decade ago when I was stupidly naive) it was fairly mild. I believe she has simply had so much to deal with in the last few months that it was bound to happen. The glimpse of humanity there was interesting to me. She rarely discusses her feelings, everything is very tightly controlled. Internet fakers tend to rely on the emotional tug of their stories to draw people in and get their support. For example, I cried over many of the stories on NLQ, I've never cried over Ruth's story. She seems to view it with a certain detachment - this is what happened, this was my feeling at the time, it's now in the past.

Enough of my armchair psychology! I could be barking completely up the wrong tree, but I've prefaced most of my points by saying "I believe..."

I enjoy reading her sporadic posts, but I am too poor myself to go donating to her cause. If I were better off I would most likely send something via paypal, nothing huge, but maybe $20 or so. I've worked for a few charities over the years, and fundraised for many more, and the whole point of donating is that it is done not to get something in return. I never expect more than blanket gratitude for my donations or fundraising efforts, the one time I got a personalised thank you was when I raised £800 for charity by climbing a volcano. Any other times, including donating nappies and baby clothes to a very hard up fundy friend, thanks is not required, as long as someone benefits from what I've donated. I think expectations or demands of thanks undermine the whole ethos of donating. And that's my point - she has a button for people to 'donate' if they choose. She has never begged people to donate, or solicited for gifts (the mention of Disneyland came close, but I think that was more of a blunder born of inexperience in asking for anything. Once people said it might not be a good idea, the issue was dropped) as I have seen many others do.

[apple1]

Anonymity is better served by journaling than by blogging.

Perhaps Alecto has a comment on trouble with the login screen of FJ.

[formergothardite]

If her father is sending messages saying that he will hurt her younger siblings if she doesn't do what he says, then she needs to forward those to the local CPS. People in ATI already knows her dad has three rebellious children because not only do you have to put info on all your children (even adults who don't live at home) on the yearly ATI application, one of the first things people ask when ATI families meet is about ALL the children. Since she has been in ATI a long time, she will get asked about. We used to hear info about ATI families that we barely knew who had rebellious children. All as "prayer request" but still gossip travels fast in ATI.

If she wants to be anonymous, fine, it is her blog, but if she has blogged about abuse, then she really needs to report it and stop trying to protect her father.