Jim Bob and Michelle giving tv interview

[Catwoman]

Caring for I have no issue with. Raising I do. Apparently you don't. Oh well. We disagree.

 

I cared for my younger siblings often, but I can tell you, it was frequently sub-optimal. Tweens and teens don't often make good substitute parents in our culture. I was no exception.

 

Also, I can't remember this for certain, but I think in earlier years, all the older sibs had younger "buddies" in the Duggar family, but they switched to only the girls being buddies at some point. Presumably, this would be the precipitating event. I remember one of the early shows where Josh was trying to reason a recalcitrant toddler to accept naptime, while JB and M were about to leave in the van with the seats removed for a grocery run. So I think the olders were all buddies to a sib until some point when the girls took on all the serogate parent duties.

 

What would happen if they had six boys before they had ten girls? Instead of four conveniently-placed girls who could run everything and be sub-mothers to three or four younger brothers and sisters.

Well, for one thing, Michelle might have actually had to be... you know... a MOM to those kids, instead of a queen bee who does little other than make more babies for her other kids to take care of.

 

Maybe my impression of her is wrong because I have only seen their show a few times, but I never saw Michelle do any real work. And the one thing that really stayed with me was when one of their little ones got lost in an airport and Michelle wasn't frantic. She was like, "Tra la la, Jim Bob will find him," and It dawned on me that she couldn't possibly be close to that child. Who among us wouldn't be in a panic if one of our kids was lost in an airport? But Michelle just sat there with a mildly concerned look on her face. I wanted to slap her. And then when the child was found, he didn't want Michelle to hug him; he wanted his sister. I think that said a lot.

[ktgrok]

Well, for one thing, Michelle might have actually had to be... you know... a MOM to those kids, instead of a queen bee who does little other than make more babies for her other kids to take care of.

 

Maybe my impression of her is wrong because I have only seen their show a few times, but I never saw Michelle do any real work. And the one thing that really stayed with me was when one of their little ones got lost in an airport and Michelle wasn't frantic. She was like, "Tra la la, Jim Bob will find him," and It dawned on me that she couldn't possibly be close to that child. Who among us wouldn't be in a panic if one of our kids was lost in an airport? But Michelle just sat there with a mildly concerned look on her face. I wanted to slap her. And then when the child was found, he didn't want Michelle to hug him; he wanted his sister. I think that said a lot.

 

I've never seen that episode, but that's terrifying. My 2 year old got lost just last month, at a very large homeschool convention. I was distraught beyond belief. It was maybe 5 minutes, but it felt like forever. I was sobbing out of control, waiting at the main event booth while volunteers fanned out to look for him. When they found him and were carrying him back to me I RAN to him, and just held him sobbing for several minutes. I think I said thank you, but I'm not even sure. I was a wreck. Worst few minutes of my life. (Didn't help that this was right after all our conversations here and we were feet from the ATI Alert booth). Lost in an airport? Where anyone could have taken him? I'd be a basket case. 

[Slartibartfast]

If people don't realize by now that this is a problem across all walks of life, there's no help for them. Did everyone get turned off football after the Jerry Sandusky stuff?

 

 Multiple people faced charges for failing to report child abuse as a result of the scandal and were fired from Penn State.

 

Since you are comparing the two do you agree the Duggars should be fired from their show?

[albeto.]

Well, for one thing, Michelle might have actually had to be... you know... a MOM to those kids, instead of a queen bee who does little other than make more babies for her other kids to take care of.

 

Maybe my impression of her is wrong because I have only seen their show a few times, but I never saw Michelle do any real work. And the one thing that really stayed with me was when one of their little ones got lost in an airport and Michelle wasn't frantic. She was like, "Tra la la, Jim Bob will find him," and It dawned on me that she couldn't possibly be close to that child. Who among us wouldn't be in a panic if one of our kids was lost in an airport? But Michelle just sat there with a mildly concerned look on her face. I wanted to slap her. And then when the child was found, he didn't want Michelle to hug him; he wanted his sister. I think that said a lot.

 

I can understand her looking all serene and like some modern day Mary, Mother of Jesus Who Never Lost Her Beautiful Temper (there's a reason Michelangelo portrayed her so young in his Pietà - to show her innocence and youthful beauty). She is a self-appointed ambassador of the king of kings, the one who is sovereign over all things, including the safety of a toddler who wanders off and gets lost. Fretting would only show she doesn't really trust her god, and what kind of ambassador betrays her king through lack of loyalty? Besides, she's got an image to uphold.

 

But a baby wanting his sister for comfort? Is Michelle nothing more than a breeder and nursemaid for her king of kings? What an utterly humiliating role to be relegated to. 

[HRAAB]

I read about the episode when the little boy was lost in the airport, but the words do not compute.  It is so foreign to me that I have to wonder if some of it was staged or something, or that he had only hid for a few seconds and they'd already found him.  Because they're on a show, and imo reality shows are a bunch of acting.  (I detest reality shows)  I lost my dd in Costco one time.  Turned my back to look at something for a few seconds, turned back around and she was gone.  Oh My God.  I have never felt such terror and panic before in my life.  I was frantic.  I was a wreck for the rest of the day.  So NO, a serene mom while her son is lost in an airport - An Airport, Busy, People, People, People - just does not compute.  If it wasn't staged, maybe she's on medication.  Because there has to be some answer.

 

Even if I were watching someone else's child, I would still be frantic and in panic mode.  How could you not?

[maize]

I wouldn't be sitting calmly and doing nothing if my child were lost, but I wouldn't likely be sobbing and acting frantic and panicky either--that's just not my temperament (unless I have PMS; then all bets are off ;) ).

 

As for the young child turning to the sister for comfort--of course a child will turn to their primary caregiver. Do we condemn every mother who allows someone else--a spouse, a grandparent, a nanny--to take the role of primary caregiver?

 

I come from a large family, and the relationships I had with my youngest siblings were and are something I treasure. I doubt my family had much in common with the Duggars, but some of the things people are pointing to as massive problems (such as a child turning to a much older sibling for comfort) do not strike me as problematic in and of themselves.

[Catwoman]

I wouldn't be sitting calmly and doing nothing if my child were lost, but I wouldn't likely be sobbing and acting frantic and panicky either--that's just not my temperament (unless I have PMS; then all bets are off ;) ).

 

As for the young child turning to the sister for comfort--of course a child will turn to their primary caregiver. Do we condemn every mother who allows someone else--a spouse, a grandparent, a nanny--to take the role of primary caregiver?

 

I come from a large family, and the relationships I had with my youngest siblings were and are something I treasure. I doubt my family had much in common with the Duggars, but some of the things people are pointing to as massive problems (such as a child turning to a much older sibling for comfort) do not strike me as problematic in and of themselves.

Did you see the episode where the child was lost in the airport? I would challenge anyone who saw it to tell me there was nothing unnatural about the way in which Michelle handled the situation.

 

And when I say "handled," I mean "did absolutely nothing."

 

Additionally, I think there is a very big problem when the mother isn't the primary caregiver to her children when she is a SAHM. It's nice when siblings pitch in and help, but the children should still think of their mother (or father) as their primary caregivers, not one of their older siblings.

[HRAAB]

Honestly, the fact that older siblings cared for younger ones is less of a concern for me than other practices.  My older girls helped a lot when the twins were born.  I needed help, and I admit I used their help or I wouldn't have made it very well.  However, my older dds were never the primary care givers.  I knew that was my job.  I suppose if I lived in a different age and culture, I wouldn't feel that way.  I am a product of my upbringing.  I've also seen the negative side of it in my dh's family.  There were 14 children in 20 years, and older siblings had an enormous responsibility to care for younger ones, sometimes beyond their maturity level.  It didn't all turn out good.  I'm sure most of us here have had older children help with younger ones, but there can be extremes as happened in dh's family.  I do believe parents have the final responsibility when it comes to their children.  There is a happy medium.

 

Like I said, I never saw the episode where the little boy was lost.  The way Michelle has been described, and from the times I've seen her on TV, no, it doesn't sound like a natural maternal response to me.  I don't cry and certainly wouldn't be sobbing in public; nevertheless, when my dd was lost, I was in panic mode, and I'm sure my eyes and shaky voice gave me away.  It's hard to hide terror.  If Michelle was talking in her normal, never stressed voice, no sign of worry on her face, then no.  It just seems off to me.  And if my child had been lost, when they were found I would be scooping them up in my arms and holding them.  But then, I can't see where I have anything whatsoever in common with Michelle and the way she mothers.

[*Lulu*]

Did you see the episode where the child was lost in the airport? I would challenge anyone who saw it to tell me there was nothing unnatural about the way in which Michelle handled the situation.

 

And when I say "handled," I mean "did absolutely nothing."

 

Additionally, I think there is a very big problem when the mother isn't the primary caregiver to her children when she is a SAHM. It's nice when siblings pitch in and help, but the children should still think of their mother (or father) as their primary caregivers, not one of their older siblings.

My personal experience has been that when an older sibling is parenting a younger sibling, in any non-marginal way, it is because there is dysfunction and/or abuse in the family.

[LucyStoner]

I wouldn't be sitting calmly and doing nothing if my child were lost, but I wouldn't likely be sobbing and acting frantic and panicky either--that's just not my temperament (unless I have PMS; then all bets are off ;) ).

 

As for the young child turning to the sister for comfort--of course a child will turn to their primary caregiver. Do we condemn every mother who allows someone else--a spouse, a grandparent, a nanny--to take the role of primary caregiver?

 

I come from a large family, and the relationships I had with my youngest siblings were and are something I treasure. I doubt my family had much in common with the Duggars, but some of the things people are pointing to as massive problems (such as a child turning to a much older sibling for comfort) do not strike me as problematic in and of themselves.

I wouldn't be visibly panicking or frantic either (and I have been in that situation more than once with a kid with autism who would not only wander but conceal himself in small spaces and zone out auditory imput, yikes) but I wouldn't be sitting on my tush either. I'd be in "go mode"- searching, problem solving, finding a security guard to show the recent picture to etc. And I'm visibly relieved when he is found.

 

ETA- unfortunately I think we do condemn and criticize mothers who are not primary caregivers due to work, loss of custody or pretty much any factor. I don't agree with that, but it is the pattern I observe.

[*Lulu*]

Honestly, the fact that older siblings cared for younger ones is less of a concern for me than other practices. My older girls helped a lot when the twins were born. I needed help, and I admit I used their help or I wouldn't have made it very well. However, my older dds were never the primary care givers. I knew that was my job. I suppose if I lived in a different age and culture, I wouldn't feel that way. I am a product of my upbringing. I've also seen the negative side of it in my dh's family. There were 14 children in 20 years, and older siblings had an enormous responsibility to care for younger ones, sometimes beyond their maturity level. It didn't all turn out good. I'm sure most of us here have had older children help with younger ones, but there can be extremes as happened in dh's family. I do believe parents have the final responsibility when it comes to their children. There is a happy medium.

 

Like I said, I never saw the episode where the little boy was lost. The way Michelle has been described, and from the times I've seen her on TV, no, it doesn't sound like a natural maternal response to me. I don't cry and certainly wouldn't be sobbing in public; nevertheless, when my dd was lost, I was in panic mode, and I'm sure my eyes and shaky voice gave me away. It's hard to hide terror. If Michelle was talking in her normal, never stressed voice, no sign of worry on her face, then no. It just seems off to me. And if my child had been lost, when they were found I would be scooping them up in my arms and holding them. But then, I can't see where I have anything whatsoever in common with Michelle and the way she mothers.

To me helping out is a different animal from parenting.

 

When my mom was around I would do things for my sister, but I didn't feel the weight of responsiblity for her in the way I did when mom was gone.

[LucyStoner]

My personal experience has been that when an older sibling is parenting a younger sibling, in any non-marginal way, it is because there is dysfunction and/or abuse in the family.

I would agree. I was a surrogate parent figure for my brother. My parents weren't abusive per say but there was a lot of dysfunction and some neglect. Not only was it not fair to my brother, it was not fair to me. Our relationship is fundamentally different than it could be.

[kahlanne]

I've never seen that episode, but that's terrifying. My 2 year old got lost just last month, at a very large homeschool convention. I was distraught beyond belief. It was maybe 5 minutes, but it felt like forever. I was sobbing out of control, waiting at the main event booth while volunteers fanned out to look for him. When they found him and were carrying him back to me I RAN to him, and just held him sobbing for several minutes. I think I said thank you, but I'm not even sure. I was a wreck. Worst few minutes of my life. (Didn't help that this was right after all our conversations here and we were feet from the ATI Alert booth). Lost in an airport? Where anyone could have taken him? I'd be a basket case. 

 

See I am just the opposite. When there is an emergency I am calm and detached. This is my coping mechanism. Many don't understand it but it helped me get through molestation, control issues with a church, my parents volatile divorce, and many other things. Realizing my life could be a soap opera or at the very least a good book if I was a better writer. Back to the topic....I detach and deal with the situation at hand. I only become emotional on my own time once things have been settled. We went to the zoo with a large group and my daughter disappeared. She was around 8. It was a large Zoo in New Orleans and I was terrified but didn't appear as so according to viewers. Immediately I doled out assignments of who was to search where and I headed to the park officials. My daughter had went to an official and told them she was lost and they rode around on their cart looking for us. Once I saw her I was so happy and hugged her and thanked the officers but still was somewhat detached. I joked that I was going to kill her for worrying me like that and fussed at her for not keeping up while hugging her so tightly. It wasn't until back at home alone that I broke down. It is honestly my way of coping. Doesn't mean I am not a great mom or that I am not close to my children. Anyone that knows me knows otherwise. In Michelle's situation I won't use this one instance to judge her role as mom. It might be one consideration if I was a viewer of the show but I felt it necessary to point out that being emotional or not isn't a great way to judge connection between people.

[maize]

Did you see the episode where the child was lost in the airport? I would challenge anyone who saw it to tell me there was nothing unnatural about the way in which Michelle handled the situation.

 

And when I say "handled," I mean "did absolutely nothing."

 

Additionally, I think there is a very big problem when the mother isn't the primary caregiver to her children when she is a SAHM. It's nice when siblings pitch in and help, but the children should still think of their mother (or father) as their primary caregivers, not one of their older siblings.

 

And not a problem if the mother is not a SAHM? Why so? If she were working outside of the home she could still qualify as an acceptable mother even if her child's primary caregiver were someone else, but not if she is home? Does a father qualify as an acceptable father if his child's primary care giver is someone other than himself? 

 

Honestly, the more I think about this the more it is bothering me. Why is Michelle but not Jim Bob criticized if a child runs to their sibling for comfort instead of a parent? Isn't this just another expression of the way our culture encourages criticism of women and mothers? Michelle is obviously not motherly enough since her child turned to someone else for comfort! How dare she not meet someone else's expectations of what is acceptable behavior for a mother. 

 

It just feels like another episode of the Mommy Wars: Michelle is not a Real Mommy because she does not mother in a way acceptable to me.

 

I am not a Duggar fan. I don't watch the show, I have no idea what kind of person Michelle really is. Maybe she has a personality disorder of some kind that makes her distant and unemotional. I have no idea. It is entirely possible that I would disagree with 100% of her parenting decisions if I were to observe them in action. I am not, however, comfortable with the license we as a society seem to take for granted to criticize every woman whose life and parenting choices do not meet our specific standards--nor with the massive difference between the standards for mothers and fathers. 

[*Lulu*]

I wouldn't be visibly panicking or frantic either (and I have been in that situation more than once with a kid with autism who would not only wander but conceal himself in small spaces, yikes) but I wouldn't be sitting on my tush either. I'd be in "go mode"- searching, problem solving, finding a security guard to show the recent picture to etc. And I'm visibly relieved when he is found.

My gosh yes!

 

Even when Punk bolted in the store at age 9 and I KNEW he was one aisle over, following me because he really didn't want to lose me, I felt sick and worried.

 

When he was 2 and pulled his first Houdini (while I was v.e.r.y. pregnant) on the second floor of the Dillard's department store my mom and I were calling and sweeping the floor worried that he would try to go down the escalator alone and get hurt. (He was hiding in a clothing rack. How we missed him I'll never know because we were looking in them. He jumped out and growled at me the third-ish time I came through the area he was in. I didn't understand how you could want to shake someone and hug them at the same time before that moment!

[idnib]

Additionally, I think there is a very big problem when the mother isn't the primary caregiver to her children when she is a SAHM. It's nice when siblings pitch in and help, but the children should still think of their mother (or father) as their primary caregivers, not one of their older siblings.

 

I think this is a cultural construct.

 

My background is from a "third world" country. These days people are having smaller families, usually 3-5 children. But in my grandparents' time, they had lots of children. My dad is one of 12 live births (8 survived childhood), born while my grandmother was between the ages of 14 and 40-something. My dad, who was about 20 years younger than his oldest sister, was cared for by her. By the time he was born, she was already married and had 2 children of her own. She cared for him as her third child and even nursed him. My grandmother proceeded to have more children and was busy with that. She handed them off to her daughters to raise. She wasn't lazy; they were just tribal people who raised kids in a communal fashion.

 

One of my dad's close friends in Nigerian. He was raised in a village in which all the women (including the child's older sisters) took care of all children as their own, including nursing. He didn't know which woman was his mother until he was 9 or 10. 

 

I'm not defending the Duggars, just saying there are many ways to raise children that don't involve the mom as primary caregiver.

[HRAAB]

And not a problem if the mother is not a SAHM? Why so? If she were working outside of the home she could still qualify as an acceptable mother even if her child's primary caregiver were someone else, but not if she is home? Does a father qualify as an acceptable father if his child's primary care giver is someone other than himself? 

 

Honestly, the more I think about this the more it is bothering me. Why is Michelle but not Jim Bob criticized if a child runs to their sibling for comfort instead of a parent? Isn't this just another expression of the way our culture encourages criticism of women and mothers? Michelle is obviously not motherly enough since her child turned to someone else for comfort! How dare she not meet someone else's expectations of what is acceptable behavior for a mother. 

 

It just feels like another episode of the Mommy Wars: Michelle is not a Real Mommy because she does not mother in a way acceptable to me.

 

I am not a Duggar fan. I don't watch the show, I have no idea what kind of person Michelle really is. Maybe she has a personality disorder of some kind that makes her distant and unemotional. I have no idea. It is entirely possible that I would disagree with 100% of her parenting decisions if I were to observe them in action. I am not, however, comfortable with the license we as a society seem to take for granted to criticize every woman whose life and parenting choices do not meet our specific standards--and the massive difference between the standards for mothers and fathers. 

 

Good point about Jim Bob.  But I don't think that's part of his role as father and head of the house.

 

I think so much of the focus is on Michelle because they follow such extremely traditional male/female roles.  Michelle is the mother, keeper of the house and children.  Jim Bob is...well...say something nice.... bread winner.  Women stay home, birth babies and everything that goes along with children.  Very traditional.  Jim Bob can have a job, be in politics, or drag his family onto a TV reality show whether they want it or not.  I have not idea if they did want it or not.  Because of what they preach, we look to Michelle following a very traditional role model as a mother.  She has set herself up.  When she doesn't behave in the traditional way, I think it's pretty natural people will point it out.

[Guest]

I read about the episode when the little boy was lost in the airport, but the words do not compute. It is so foreign to me that I have to wonder if some of it was staged or something, or that he had only hid for a few seconds and they'd already found him. Because they're on a show, and imo reality shows are a bunch of acting. (I detest reality shows) I lost my dd in Costco one time. Turned my back to look at something for a few seconds, turned back around and she was gone. Oh My God. I have never felt such terror and panic before in my life. I was frantic. I was a wreck for the rest of the day. So NO, a serene mom while her son is lost in an airport - An Airport, Busy, People, People, People - just does not compute. If it wasn't staged, maybe she's on medication. Because there has to be some answer.

 

Even if I were watching someone else's child, I would still be frantic and in panic mode. How could you not?

I think what happened with that particular case was this: jackson, who was probably four or so years old, stepped onto a moving sidewalk conveyor and rolled out of sight. I believe the camera crew were observing all of this, knowing Jackson was "lost" and filming for the patental reaction when he was missed. So, the net result is that the boy was terrified when he found himself "lost", but the crew knew his whereabouts the whole time. It might even have been totally staged, but in any case, my notion is that it was partially staged, as he was never truly lost. What bothered me was the hysterical Jackson sitting on Jana's lap while Michelle was watching from afar with that weirdly concerned-but-not-really look on her face. Besides which Jana looks dutiful but not warm towards the crying boy.

[Catwoman]

And not a problem if the mother is not a SAHM? Why so? If she were working outside of the home she could still qualify as an acceptable mother even if her child's primary caregiver were someone else, but not if she is home? Does a father qualify as an acceptable father if his child's primary care giver is someone other than himself?

 

Honestly, the more I think about this the more it is bothering me. Why is Michelle but not Jim Bob criticized if a child runs to their sibling for comfort instead of a parent? Isn't this just another expression of the way our culture encourages criticism of women and mothers? Michelle is obviously not motherly enough since her child turned to someone else for comfort! How dare she not meet someone else's expectations of what is acceptable behavior for a mother.

 

It just feels like another episode of the Mommy Wars: Michelle is not a Real Mommy because she does not mother in a way acceptable to me.

 

I am not a Duggar fan. I don't watch the show, I have no idea what kind of person Michelle really is. Maybe she has a personality disorder of some kind that makes her distant and unemotional. I have no idea. It is entirely possible that I would disagree with 100% of her parenting decisions if I were to observe them in action. I am not, however, comfortable with the license we as a society seem to take for granted to criticize every woman whose life and parenting choices do not meet our specific standards--nor with the massive difference between the standards for mothers and fathers.

I didn't criticize Jim Bob because he sprang into action immediately when he found out the child was lost. He did something. Michelle did nothing. I may not like Jim Bob Duggar, but I admired the way he handled that particular situation. He did what a parent should do, and he didn't rest until the child was found.

 

I get sick of the "oh it's Mommy Wars" excuse because sometimes moms don't do the right thing, or who are we to judge what another mom does. It's like hey, they're moms, so we should respect them and give them a pass. Well, no. I don't agree with that. Are we supposed to respect the Naugler mom's parenting choices and not criticize her for not meeting our specific parenting standards, too?

 

In the airport situation, I believe Michelle screwed up when her child was lost. She screwed up when she passed her parenting responsibilities on to her older children. If that's Mommy Wars, so be it.

 

And yes, I do give working moms more leeway then stay-at-home moms when it comes to little kids running to the babysitter before their mom if they get hurt or scared, because the kids see the sitter during far more of their waking hours than they see their moms because their moms have to be at work. If a mom is at home, you bet I think she should be the one the kids run to. Without question. And if the dad is the primary caregiver, I think it makes perfect sense that the kids would rush to him in a stressful situation.

[Catwoman]

See I am just the opposite. When there is an emergency I am calm and detached. This is my coping mechanism. Many don't understand it but it helped me get through molestation, control issues with a church, my parents volatile divorce, and many other things. Realizing my life could be a soap opera or at the very least a good book if I was a better writer. Back to the topic....I detach and deal with the situation at hand. I only become emotional on my own time once things have been settled. We went to the zoo with a large group and my daughter disappeared. She was around 8. It was a large Zoo in New Orleans and I was terrified but didn't appear as so according to viewers. Immediately I doled out assignments of who was to search where and I headed to the park officials. My daughter had went to an official and told them she was lost and they rode around on their cart looking for us. Once I saw her I was so happy and hugged her and thanked the officers but still was somewhat detached. I joked that I was going to kill her for worrying me like that and fussed at her for not keeping up while hugging her so tightly. It wasn't until back at home alone that I broke down. It is honestly my way of coping. Doesn't mean I am not a great mom or that I am not close to my children. Anyone that knows me knows otherwise. In Michelle's situation I won't use this one instance to judge her role as mom. It might be one consideration if I was a viewer of the show but I felt it necessary to point out that being emotional or not isn't a great way to judge connection between people.

The difference between you and Michelle Duggar is that you took action to find your child. You did everything possible to get people organized and get help. If Michelle had been calm, but was brainstorming about how to find her child, I would have admired her coolheadedness in a stressful situation. But she didn't do anything like that.

[Annie G]

I think what happened with that particular case was this: jackson, who was probably four or so years old, stepped onto a moving sidewalk conveyor and rolled out of sight. I believe the camera crew were observing all of this, knowing Jackson was "lost" and filming for the patental reaction when he was missed. So, the net result is that the boy was terrified when he found himself "lost", but the crew knew his whereabouts the whole time. It might even have been totally staged, but in any case, my notion is that it was partially staged, as he was never truly lost. What bothered me was the hysterical Jackson sitting on Jana's lap while Michelle was watching from afar with that weirdly concerned-but-not-really look on her face. Besides which Jana looks dutiful but not warm towards the crying boy.

 

Wasn't Jackson part of Jana's buddy team? If so, she was probably concerned that she was going to be in trouble for losing sight of him in the first place. And having the film crew document it probably didn't help Jana feel about better about it. 

 

I actually didn't think that was the worst display of how Michelle handles a crisis.When Jason fell into the orchestra pit in Atlanta and was hurt, Michelle was by his side...but was filming it on her iPhone.  Yeah, that's the first thing I think about when my kid gets hurt.  And she even pointed out that the other kids were filming. Put your phones down, people!

 

Edited to remove link in case it violates the 'no images' rule here. Sorry, Susan. 

[Catwoman]

Wasn't Jackson part of Jana's buddy team? If so, she was probably concerned that she was going to be in trouble for losing sight of him in the first place. And having the film crew document it probably didn't help Jana feel about better about it.

 

I actually didn't think that was the worst display of how Michelle handles a crisis.When Jason fell into the orchestra pit in Atlanta and was hurt, Michelle was by his side...but was filming it on her iPhone. Yeah, that's the first thing I think about when my kid gets hurt. And she even pointed out that the other kids were filming. Put your phones down, people!

 

http://www.tlc.com/tv-shows/19-kids-and-counting/videos/duggars-scare/

Holy cow! I hadn't heard that story before!!! :svengo:

 

Thanks for posting it.

[SKL]

Well, for one thing, Michelle might have actually had to be... you know... a MOM to those kids, instead of a queen bee who does little other than make more babies for her other kids to take care of.

 

Maybe my impression of her is wrong because I have only seen their show a few times, but I never saw Michelle do any real work. And the one thing that really stayed with me was when one of their little ones got lost in an airport and Michelle wasn't frantic. She was like, "Tra la la, Jim Bob will find him," and It dawned on me that she couldn't possibly be close to that child. Who among us wouldn't be in a panic if one of our kids was lost in an airport? But Michelle just sat there with a mildly concerned look on her face. I wanted to slap her. And then when the child was found, he didn't want Michelle to hug him; he wanted his sister. I think that said a lot.

 

Some people don't make a display when things like that happen.  I know I don't.  I need all of my mental energy to keep aware of the situation and decide what to do.  Also, I don't panic around my kids because I don't want them to panic.  An airport is a very safe place even though it may seem big and scary to a small child.  A calm parent is more helpful than a distraught parent IMO.

 

The boy not wanting his mom afterwards, I don't know, I didn't see the show.  Maybe he thinks she is going to spank him for not being where he was supposed to be.

 

Also, if they were filming at that time, do you really think the boy was lost?  Surely he had many eyes on him or people near him.

[Kari C in SC]

I watched the interview a little while ago. I think what stuck out the most to me was they kept saying the girls didn't know and if they did know, they didn't understand what was happening. For me, personally, that it appalling. When I was 8 years old, we took a family vacation with lots of friends. One older adult male also went on this trip. I was down at the lake alone. Yes, in 1980, kids ran around a resort alone. He came up to me and told me that he would "help" me with what he said was needed sunscreen. I was innocent. If an adult that I sort of knew because of my parents said I should have sunscreen, I thought I should do what he said. He went onto fondle me. Though not aggressively or as the Duggars said, "not rape"... It was inappropriate for him to touch me in that way. I was not sure what was going on, but I remember quickly running down and jumping in the lake because I just wasn't sure about any of it. I did not tell my parents because like Michelle Duggar said about her girls... I just didn't really know what was happening. I pretty much blocked the incident from my mind and luckily for me, I really only saw this man a couple more times over the next few years and was never alone with him again. For many years I would wake up in a panic and not know what the reason was. It was not until my 20s sometime that I was asleep and was flailing around and smacked my husband! He was like what the heck and it all came back to me. I told my mom and she was devastated. It was NOT my parents fault. I could have told them and they would have believed me. The thing is that I never had to deal with this man again or be around him. I don't think I could have lived that way. And this whole story goes around to the Duggars excusing it because the girls didn't really know what was happening. That does NOT make it okay. In fact, I think that might even make it worse.

[SKL]

I think this is a cultural construct.

 

My background is from a "third world" country. These days people are having smaller families, usually 3-5 children. But in my grandparents' time, they had lots of children. My dad is one of 12 live births (8 survived childhood), born while my grandmother was between the ages of 14 and 40-something. My dad, who was about 20 years younger than his oldest sister, was cared for by her. By the time he was born, she was already married and had 2 children of her own. She cared for him as her third child and even nursed him. My grandmother proceeded to have more children and was busy with that. She handed them off to her daughters to raise. She wasn't lazy; they were just tribal people who raised kids in a communal fashion.

 

One of my dad's close friends in Nigerian. He was raised in a village in which all the women (including the child's older sisters) took care of all children as their own, including nursing. He didn't know which woman was his mother until he was 9 or 10. 

 

I'm not defending the Duggars, just saying there are many ways to raise children that don't involve the mom as primary caregiver.

 

Right, I know many very respectable families in more traditional cultures who essentially hand off their kids to their grandparents or other relatives to raise - often in a distant city or even country.  And nobody bats an eye.  It even makes me feel uncomfortable, because it is so different from the way I was raised.

[SKL]

The difference between you and Michelle Duggar is that you took action to find your child. You did everything possible to get people organized and get help. If Michelle had been calm, but was brainstorming about how to find her child, I would have admired her coolheadedness in a stressful situation. But she didn't do anything like that.

 

As you pointed out, there was another competent parent doing all that was needed to find the child.  Michelle knew the child was not in real danger, and her acting frantic would just be a redundant, fake, and frankly stupid display IMO.  But then I get annoyed when I see excessive emotions on TV.

 

[Catwoman]

As you pointed out, there was another competent parent doing all that was needed to find the child. Michelle knew the child was not in real danger, and her acting frantic would just be a redundant, fake, and frankly stupid display IMO. But then I get annoyed when I see excessive emotions on TV.

 

Who said she should act frantic?

 

And how did she know her child was "not in real danger?" He was a very young boy, alone in an airport. Are you saying you wouldn't have been worried sick if one of your little girls wandered off alone in an airport and you had no idea where she was? :svengo:

 

Disagree with me all you'd like, but I would wager that the vast majority of parents would be very worried -- and yes, even feel panicky -- if their little one disappeared in a busy airport. That would be a huge deal to most people.

[redsquirrel]

But, if they were always asleep or if they were awake but didn't understand, why does it say in the police report that they told their father what Joshua did?  There are corroborating statements from the girls to the police, they confirmed what had happened. How could they corroborate and give a statement if they either did not understand what what happening or if they were asleep? And what about the time he came up behind a sister and molested her while she was either putting in or taking out clothes from the washing machine? Which ever sister that was, she was awake and she told, so she understood.

 

Maybe i am wrong, I can check the police statement, but I thought I read statements given by some unknown to me girls that described what Joshua did.

[Rosie_0801]

So let's see....

 

Do not allow boys to babysit

 

Do not allow boys to change diapers

 

Do not allow younger siblings to sit in boys' laps

 

Or, to put it in other words, girls must avoid tempting boys and to protect boys from the work of childrearing? I hope they at least have to mow lawns or wash dishes.  :sneaky2:

[gingersmom]

I wish Nancy Grace did the interview.

[redsquirrel]

Or, to put it in other words, girls must avoid tempting boys and to protect boys from the work of childrearing? I hope they at least have to mow lawns or wash dishes.  :sneaky2:

 

What about fathers? Are they also tempted to molest if they bathe their daughters or change a diaper, or just be around them? Maybe women and girls should just go live separately to keep themselves safe.  Oh, but then who would do the laundry and the cooking?

 

And are boys only a danger to little girls or might they be tempted if they change a baby boy's diaper? I mean, if men and boys are so filled with lust and difficult to control, mightn't that also be a problem? Or are boys best raised in isolation chambers?

 

How exactly does this work?

[LucyStoner]

How exactly does this work?

Not very well.

[itsheresomewhere]

I wish Nancy Grace did the interview.

That I would have watched.

[momto10blessings]

See I am just the opposite. When there is an emergency I am calm and detached. This is my coping mechanism. .

Same here. On the outside I probably look like a cold heartless woman, but on the inside I'm freaking the heck out. I don't show emotion well to people outside of my immediate family. If it was my husband and kids I could show myself freaking out and crying, but if anyone else was around I wouldn't. I also refuse to cry at funerals.

[Annie G]

Megyn Kelly's show tonight is talking about the case and showing clips- some that weren't seen last night. For instance she just showed a clip where she asked if Josh spoke to the police in 2006 when the girls were interviewed and they hemmed and hawed but said no he didn't. She didn't ask WHY Josh didn't go in, and JB just said that by that time Josh was 18. 

 

They also discussed that family services got involved and supervised the family.  

 

Her show is repeated later tonight if anyone is interested. 

[bolt.]

So, am I the only one who thinks that it is statistically highly unlikely that a child lost in an airport is in any actual danger?

 

Stranger abductions-of-opportunity are incredibly rare. Airports are places with extra security, not low levels of surveillance and security personnel -- a further deterrent for anyone with spontaneous nefarious intent towards a child they didn't particularly expect to suddenly encounter.

 

What else could happen? Wandering into traffic? (Could happen anywhere.) Tripping and falling? Escalator danger if he were very young? Am I missing something especially scary about airports?

 

I mean, I would be upset: my child is scared and alone, and and very much needs me, and that upsets me. But 999 times out of 1,000 (probably more like 99,999 out of 100,000) he runs into helpful, competent adults (probably staff) and is sorted out swiftly. That's what I'd fully expect to be happening while I was worrying.

 

I'd also be worried about missing my flight, and about the questions (possibly 'official' sorts of questions) I might get around having lost him... But actual dangers would not be the thing on my mind.

[LucyStoner]

So, am I the only one who thinks that it is statistically highly unlikely that a child lost in an airport is in any actual danger?

 

Stranger abductions-of-opportunity are incredibly rare. Airports are places with extra security, not low levels of surveillance and security personnel -- a further deterrent for anyone with spontaneous nefarious intent towards a child they didn't particularly expect to suddenly encounter.

 

What else could happen? Wandering into traffic? (Could happen anywhere.) Tripping and falling? Escalator danger if he were very young? Am I missing something especially scary about airports?

 

I mean, I would be upset: my child is scared and alone, and and very much needs me, and that upsets me. But 999 times out of 1,000 (probably more like 99,999 out of 100,000) he runs into helpful, competent adults (probably staff) and is sorted out swiftly. That's what I'd fully expect to be happening while I was worrying.

 

I'd also be worried about missing my flight, and about the questions (possibly 'official' sorts of questions) I might get around having lost him... But actual dangers would not be the thing on my mind.

I am the first person to chime up on not overestimating stranger danger and how we can't live in fear. I'm pretty chill when my kids are out and about. But truthfully, when I had a very young child prone to bolting in airports, my first thought was that you don't need a ticket or any ID for "lap babies" to board a plane. Or any ID for a ticketed child to board a domestic flight. I know this is a small risk, but it stuck with me.

 

We got a monkey backpack leash thing. He was 1-2 and could cover a lot of ground, very fast.

[bolt.]

Really? I've needed to document my "lap baby" flights in the normal way -- but I totally would make sure a toddler stayed with me. Not nessusarily to prevent kidnapping: but to prevent crazy stress, chasing down, delays, missed planes and everything else. Loosing a kid is not a picnic, and it should be prevented with all diligence. I don't mean, "La la, run off if you like, some kind soul will surely return you eventually..."

 

I just am thinking that 'immediate danger' is not my immediate reaction to a lost child, because I become cool and logical in a crisis, and it's not logical to believe that terribly unlikely things are probably happening. It's logical to believe that the world is still a normal place, even if you can't see your child.

[Guest]

So, am I the only one who thinks that it is statistically highly unlikely that a child lost in an airport is in any actual danger?

 

Stranger abductions-of-opportunity are incredibly rare. Airports are places with extra security, not low levels of surveillance and security personnel -- a further deterrent for anyone with spontaneous nefarious intent towards a child they didn't particularly expect to suddenly encounter.

 

What else could happen? Wandering into traffic? (Could happen anywhere.) Tripping and falling? Escalator danger if he were very young? Am I missing something especially scary about airports?

 

I mean, I would be upset: my child is scared and alone, and and very much needs me, and that upsets me. But 999 times out of 1,000 (probably more like 99,999 out of 100,000) he runs into helpful, competent adults (probably staff) and is sorted out swiftly. That's what I'd fully expect to be happening while I was worrying.

 

I'd also be worried about missing my flight, and about the questions (possibly 'official' sorts of questions) I might get around having lost him... But actual dangers would not be the thing on my mind.

I lost one of mine in the airport when he didn't hold hands and stayed in an elevator when we got off, and we couldn't get back in the door fast enough. I freaked more because he was gone when I got upstairs, missing for half an hour, nobody had seen him, and I was worried about him getting tangled up in the baggage conveyor. Someone taking him wasn't my biggest concern, though I was pissed when someone removed him from the elevator and took him to the other end of the airport instead of calling security over to him and keeping him still. It made chasing him down very difficult, especially with other small people in tow. I was pretty short tempered in my terror by the end.

 

Crying wouldn't have entered my mind. Punching the do gooder who kept walking him further away from where he was found was higher on my list, and security not calling and notifying the airport he was lost at all was also annoying.

 

I'm a business mode, get it done cool headed type when things go crazy. I don't get emotional, or the only emotion is frustration/anger. I snap and yell when I'm scared and things are over with, not flip out in the middle. Everyone is different in this regard but I'm always more shaken up afterward!

[Joker]

Really? I've needed to document my "lap baby" flights in the normal way -- but I totally would make sure a toddler stayed with me. Not nessusarily to prevent kidnapping: but to prevent crazy stress, chasing down, delays, missed planes and everything else. Loosing a kid is not a picnic, and it should be prevented with all diligence. I don't mean, "La la, run off if you like, some kind soul will surely return you eventually..."

 

I just am thinking that 'immediate danger' is not my immediate reaction to a lost child, because I become cool and logical in a crisis, and it's not logical to believe that terribly unlikely things are probably happening. It's logical to believe that the world is still a normal place, even if you can't see your child.

 

I've never had to document my dds at all. Not when they were lap babies and not when I bought them their own seat. We just took a six hour flight to the other side of the country and were asked for nothing to prove they were ours.

[IsabelC]

I agree that a kid lost in an airport is, statistically speaking, very safe. We know that the vast majority of abuse perpetrated on children is carried out by people close to the child, such as parents, step-parents, and so on. We know that the vast majority of 'missing' children are found, unharmed, within a few hours. However, knowing those things doesn't make you feel any more calm when your child is missing!

FWIW, I have experienced two occasions when my kids went missing away from our home for short periods. First time was my elder daughter when she was only two and we were at the town agricultural show. She was missing for maybe 10 or 15 minutes (it seemed like much longer at the time). Second time was the same daughter aged 7, when she, her brother and her friend all failed to turn up after school (turned out the friend had persuaded my daughter to walk home to her [friend's] house, which she thought was only minutes' walk from the school but was in fact almost an hour's walk away - she had only ever been by bus or in her family's car - while her aspie brother has gone alone despite knowing it was wrong, because he did not want to break his promise to me that they should always walk together). They were missing for about an hour. I had read plenty of information and statistics about this. I knew that the odds of anything terrible having occurred were infinitesimally small. The police officers involved reassured us that the odds were overwhelmingly in our favor. But I still imagined all kinds of worst-case scenarios. I still felt like vomiting because I was so frantic with worry. And while I probably wasn't visibly hysterical, there was no way I was going to stop searching and calmly sit down somewhere. And yes, dh and I both felt more sick and shaky later on after the kids were in bed, so we must also be the 'act now, panic fully afterwards' types.

[Guest]

I've never had to document my dds at all. Not when they were lap babies and not when I bought them their own seat. We just took a six hour flight to the other side of the country and were asked for nothing to prove they were ours.

Maybe it depends on the airline? With Alaska Air we always have to put their name on my ticket and it is chedked when we board for both names. Some of this is because lap babies can't sit with adults in certain seats anymore. When they have missed the baby on my ticket and figure it out at the gate, they make a note on the boarding pass in pen and in the system as well.

 

But I don't have experience flying with infants on another carrier.

[Joker]

Maybe it depends on the airline? With Alaska Air we always have to put their name on my ticket and it is chedked when we board for both names. Some of this is because lap babies can't sit with adults in certain seats anymore. When they have missed the baby on my ticket and figure it out at the gate, they make a note on the boarding pass in pen and in the system as well.

 

But I don't have experience flying with infants on another carrier.

 

I don't consider providing a name as being documentation. I have to show my ID matches my pass when going through security but I have never had to show anything for my dds other than a name.

[albeto.]

It seems to me people are getting bogged down on the one illustration, when I'm interpreting the whole airport thing as an example of a bigger issue. As I understand Cat's point, it's not that a "real mother" would feel panicked and horrified the moment they realized their toddler was missing and those who don't must have refrigerators for hearts, but that this is yet one more random example in which this lady fails to show appropriate social interaction. 

[LucyStoner]

Really? I've needed to document my "lap baby" flights in the normal way -- but I totally would make sure a toddler stayed with me. Not nessusarily to prevent kidnapping: but to prevent crazy stress, chasing down, delays, missed planes and everything else. Loosing a kid is not a picnic, and it should be prevented with all diligence. I don't mean, "La la, run off if you like, some kind soul will surely return you eventually..."

 

I just am thinking that 'immediate danger' is not my immediate reaction to a lost child, because I become cool and logical in a crisis, and it's not logical to believe that terribly unlikely things are probably happening. It's logical to believe that the world is still a normal place, even if you can't see your child.

While flying domestically with kids over the last 11 years, I've never been asked for any ID or documents for my sons other than their tickets. We aren't frequent flyers but we have flown with them more than a few times. There's really no way to match the kid to the ticket unless you have a passport, which you don't need for domestic flights and which most children do not have. I suppose I could have been asked for a birth certificate and I have heard others have been/are, but I have never been asked for anything. Now that they are older, I don't have that image but yeah, it crossed my mind.

 

Making sure my son didn't bolt off was a big deal when flying solo with kids because he could seriously be gone in the time it took me to find a ticket in my bag or buy a cookie. So that's why he was in a carrier or wearing his monkey backpack leash thingy. I was more worried about him hiding than being kidnapped, for sure but I have wondered what is to stop someone from boarding with a lap baby that isn't theirs. Honestly though I imagine nearly all kidnapped kids who pass through airports are involved in custody disputes or are trafficking victims so I do admit my thought is pretty out there.

[Catwoman]

I agree that a kid lost in an airport is, statistically speaking, very safe. We know that the vast majority of abuse perpetrated on children is carried out by people close to the child, such as parents, step-parents, and so on. We know that the vast majority of 'missing' children are found, unharmed, within a few hours. However, knowing those things doesn't make you feel any more calm when your child is missing!

 

FWIW, I have experienced two occasions when my kids went missing away from our home for short periods. First time was my elder daughter when she was only two and we were at the town agricultural show. She was missing for maybe 10 or 15 minutes (it seemed like much longer at the time). Second time was the same daughter aged 7, when she, her brother and her friend all failed to turn up after school (turned out the friend had persuaded my daughter to walk home to her [friend's] house, which she thought was only minutes' walk from the school but was in fact almost an hour's walk away - she had only ever been by bus or in her family's car - while her aspie brother has gone alone despite knowing it was wrong, because he did not want to break his promise to me that they should always walk together). They were missing for about an hour. I had read plenty of information and statistics about this. I knew that the odds of anything terrible having occurred were infinitesimally small. The police officers involved reassured us that the odds were overwhelmingly in our favor. But I still imagined all kinds of worst-case scenarios. I still felt like vomiting because I was so frantic with worry. And while I probably wasn't visibly hysterical, there was no way I was going to stop searching and calmly sit down somewhere. And yes, dh and I both felt more sick and shaky later on after the kids were in bed, so we must also be the 'act now, panic fully afterwards' types.

:iagree:

 

It's very easy to be rational and calm and to know that, statistically speaking, all will probably be perfectly fine.... until it's your little one who is lost.

[LucyStoner]

:iagree:

 

It's very easy to be rational and calm and to know that, statistically speaking, all will probably be perfectly fine.... until it's your little one who is lost.

Yeah, my younger son went missing for a short time at a large park recently and my older son went off alone in the downtown branch of the public library recently. I wasn't worried but I wasn't not worried IYKWIM!

[Catwoman]

It seems to me people are getting bogged down on the one illustration, when I'm interpreting the whole airport thing as an example of a bigger issue. As I understand Cat's point, it's not that a "real mother" would feel panicked and horrified the moment they realized their toddler was missing and those who don't must have refrigerators for hearts, but that this is yet one more random example in which this lady fails to show appropriate social interaction.

Yes, that is exactly right. :)

 

I'm outwardly calm in a crisis, too, but I am all about getting organized and taking quick action, or if it was decided that I would be the one to stay in one place in case the child returned, I would still be constantly scanning the entire area and bugging airport staff to find out what was going on. Michelle seemed so strangely distant from the whole thing and didn't do anything at all. It was just odd -- to the point that I still remember the episode.

 

I remember thinking that if I had been in that airport, I would have been asking how I could help find the little guy, even though he wasn't my child. I was also thinking that Michelle must be on some strong tranquilizers or something.

[LucyStoner]

From how you describe it Cat, most of us would be more engaged with searching for a child that wasn't even our child. My friends' child wandered off on our joint vacation and we did nothing for that hour but search for her. It was at an amusement park and she was very young so it was distressing after the first search was futile.

 

That's when I started snapping a picture of our kids first thing in places like that because when the security guards asked for a description, none of us could even clearly remember the color of her dress. Not me, not my husband and not her parents. I'm level headed under pressure but I really had no idea how to describe her beyond "small, adorable, light brown hair and freckles."

 

It was ultimately my older son who found her. He remembered the ride she liked best and sure enough, she was going on it again and again. :P

[SKL]

Who said she should act frantic?

 

And how did she know her child was "not in real danger?" He was a very young boy, alone in an airport. Are you saying you wouldn't have been worried sick if one of your little girls wandered off alone in an airport and you had no idea where she was? :svengo:

 

Disagree with me all you'd like, but I would wager that the vast majority of parents would be very worried -- and yes, even feel panicky -- if their little one disappeared in a busy airport. That would be a huge deal to most people.

 

How did you see this on film if they were not surrounded by many people, some of whom surely had seen where the boy wandered off to, and some of whom would surely prevent him from wandering too far?  Was he in fact "alone"?  Depends on how you define "alone," I guess.

 

I don't see the point of being "worried sick" about a kid being away from my side for a few minutes.  It happens all the time and almost always ends well.  I would start the "worried sick" stuff if my kid didn't turn up fairly soon and nobody in my group could locate her.

 

The kid was 4yo (I think someone said that)?  That means he was able to speak and tell people his parents' names if not their cell phone numbers.  He wasn't in the jungle or on a busy highway or near a body of water.  And an airport normally has no unattended escape routes.  I'm pretty sure every move a person makes is recorded on security cameras, too.  Kids disappearing from airports isn't something I have ever heard of.