| Author |
Message |
Muffin
Member
08-29-2007
| Tuesday, May 26, 2015 - 12:50 pm 
At this point, after the backlash from this past week, I think the whole family needs counselling to recover. I'm not being facetious, I am being serious. To have your dirty laundry aired out for the public to read is not an easy thing. I am in no way excusing the coverup of this story, or what Josh did, but I am sure they are all struggling from this.
Good points were made today, and I am reading them all and yes, I have softened some of my views from when it first came out. It's always good to get different opinions, let them sink in, and be able to say yah or nay.
Very happy I am able to come onto this forum and read the different posts here.
|
Sanfranjoshfan
Member
09-17-2000
| Tuesday, May 26, 2015 - 1:07 pm
" You are entitled to your privacy, no matter how much people say "well, you're on a reality show, nothing is private."
I agree that they are "entitled" to their privacy even if they are on a reality show....BUT, being entitled to something doesn't mean they can actually retain it. There are ways to protect one's privacy, but going on a reality show is not one of them.
Movie stars and politicians are also "entitled" to their privacy but that doesn't mean they actually have it. The paparazzi and tabloids strip actors and performers and politicians of their privacy at every chance they get and the public eats it up.
I guess I'm just saying that no matter what one is "entitled to", whether or not they can actually have it is often out of their control....and going on a reality show is one sure way to lose that control. The Duggars rolled the dice and they lost...and now their lives will be dissected and reported on until the public grows tired of it and changes the channel.
In today's society, that is simply a fact of life. It may not be "right" but, unfortunately, it's just the way things are in this day and age. It won't change until everyone stops wanting to pry into the lives of public figures.
In other words, it will never change.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Tuesday, May 26, 2015 - 1:15 pm
When Jim Duggar was talking about incest, he was talking about *adults*, not children.
***************
Muffin - there are many kinds of counseling, and for the most part, people are not forced into them. Many people find recovery in their faith, and counseling in the same way. Whether it is effective counseling or not varies just as greatly as it does with secular counseling.
***********
SanFran, I agree. That doesn't mean I can't still think our obsessive need to know every prurient detail of someone's private life isn't sick. It's a societal illness.
|
Sadiesmom
Member
03-13-2002
| Tuesday, May 26, 2015 - 1:18 pm
look, I am going to post about this in news and views, this is really a television thread. I get confused where some stuff belongs, but nothing is ever lost on the internet including Duggar's campaign web site.
|
Moderator
Moderator
06-29-2002
| Tuesday, May 26, 2015 - 1:49 pm
Just to be clear, people are welcome to post about this here. If some people also want to post about it in N & V, of course, that is fine as well.
|
Naja
Member
06-28-2003
| Tuesday, May 26, 2015 - 9:14 pm
This video of Josh has gone viral. I saw it on the news.
He makes a joke about incest in his family. It was part of an episode from 2008. 2 years after he was sent to his hard labor rehab.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0vSNSIGASE
Yes, I know it's a joke, but it's certainly an awkward one considering what we know now.
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - 3:52 am
I think the josh situation has served to give focus to a problem that is too often swept under the rug. I've enjoyed readying everyone's comments here.
Initially I thought that it would be best if the show was cancelled. Now, I feel that for all of the little duggars and kids like them, that it would be best to keep exposing them to the world. If one is pure in one's heart, it should make no difference to what you are exposed. It would be wonderful if some of these kids could go to a real school/college.
|
Sadiesmom
Member
03-13-2002
| Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - 10:42 am
are we too quick to judge the Duggars? well, they are pretty quick to criticize a lot of people they don't know, like I am deluding myself by not believing in god, of course I do, I just wont admit it - really? that is how they think of people that won't buy their poisoned kool aid?
No, if they don't want to be judged after judging so many they don't know harshly,then stamp hypocrite on their foreheads and sent them out properly labeled.
|
Rvon
Member
12-11-2003
| Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - 10:53 am
I agree Sadiesmom.
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - 11:49 am
Agreed, Sadiesmom.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - 11:49 am
So, because they are too quick to judge, and we think that's a bad thing, then we should be quick to judge?
I'm not sure I follow that logic. 
I'm not seeing where they said people shouldn't judge them, however. Could you point that out?
|
Legalboxer
Member
11-17-2003
| Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - 12:18 pm
I agree - let's not fall quickly into what we are saying we don't like about others.
I have said from the beginning that I feel bad for josh and the victims... From all appearances it seems they did not get the professional counseling they needed - even if josh is reformed (for lack of a better word) now. I guess what I feel bad about is all the focus on Josh and not the victims. many boards consistency talk about how posters wouldn't turn in their child if he/she molested/abused someone. But would that hold true if the child was the victim? how many would report it or seek help if the child was the victim? Just seems a bit of a double standard, be it a totally normal way to react either way to protect your child depending on which side they were on.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Wednesday, May 27, 2015 - 12:25 pm
Legal - that is an important dilemma/contrast.
Even though I was a licensed professional, I was reluctant to turn *underage* kids in, because I saw how the system could make things much, much worse.
If someone had molested my son, I would turn in someone who was over 18. If under 18, I would go to the parents, and tell them what happened. If they took what I felt was appropriate action, I would leave it at that. But if not, yes, I would have to consider turning them in. The problem then is that it would expose my DS to the system as well.
|
Lilfair
Member
07-09-2003
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 5:41 am
I wonder what the statistics are regarding sexual predators reforming themselves without professional help? God forgiving one is not professional help. I have concerns for the safety of Josh's children.
|
Roxip
Member
01-29-2004
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 6:32 am
It seems that Josh was open and forthright with both his future wife and his in-laws before they were married. It would seem that she would keep a close eye.
I would wonder what the fine line is between a sexual predator and a sexually repressed young teenager going through puberty in a house full of young girls. I'm not in any way excusing what he did, but when you consider how rigid their upbringing is - well, I'm just thinking that a lot of the sexual exploration that went on when I was a teenager doesn't sound that different. And if we are to believe the story that was put out at the time that he actually brought it to light himself. Self-awareness is one of the fundamental steps to overcoming a problem isn't it?
He has had ample years to re-offend and seems to have managed to restrain himself. I would hope that would continue.
|
Lakecat
Member
10-01-2006
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 6:50 am
I agree Roxip. i do think on going counciling is important though. I've seen all too often what too rigid parenting can do. Almost always the daughters are promiscuous and I imagine it effects the sons in different ways too.
|
Connies
Member
03-11-2010
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 11:49 am
Where is the difference, or is there, of sexual curiosity and sexual predator. I agree a young boy growing up with a houseful of girls could get curious and should not have done what he did, but what he did does not make him a sexual predator especially in the case of his very own children. I know people are putting their own spin on this, but lets not get carried away.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 3:38 pm
Sexual assault/molestation are issues of power and consent.
Putting a teenaged boy in a parental role over younger girls or boys may not be the best idea and as I understand it the older children in this family did assume parental roles.
Putting boys or girls in charge of others, especially in what seems to be a very strict environment where something such as masturbation is labelled a sin.. again.. just not the best situation for the older or the younger kids.
Even well meant "experimentation" done on non consenting or not even able to consent younger kids who then may later feel at fault.. I don't think it is getting carried away to be concerned about it. That guilt that is put on young kids, or that they take on, can last a lifetime.. I know that personally.
Undoubtedly Josh was as much of a victim in this environment as those he fondled. But he's out with his own family and seems to have support, so my concern is more for the "unnamed" targets of his attention.
As for who should or should not be turned in.. that is important to try to cause the least harm possible to all the young people but since he continued to live with and have control over some of his siblings after his "counseling", I really question that part of it. All of these kids do have actual PARENTS and they just seem to have been and to be so distant from the hands on upbringing of this brood. To me those are the two at fault here.. and maybe TLC for encouraging them.
|
Happymom
Member
01-20-2003
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 5:09 pm
There is a possibility that Anna and her dad did not know the extent of Josh's actions. Josh and Jim Bob may have implied that all Josh did was make out with a girl his own age. Everything sexual outside of a marriage between a man and a woman is a sin to the Duggars.
We just don't know what Anna and her dad were told. (or what the elders and church members of the Duggars were told) I would not be surprised if Anna did not know what Josh specifically did and that his sisters were some of his victims.
We also do not know if he has violated anyone in the last 12 years. We just don't know.
|
Stormie
Member
03-01-2007
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 5:33 pm
I read today that the show wasn't cancelled, they just pulled the episodes from TLC's lineup for now, and that a final decision was still pending.
I find Josh Duggar very hypocritical. He has given speeches about the LGBT community being harmful to children, and here he is a child molester. And I believe his father has said similar things about the LGBT community, and here a child molester was living in his home.
I don't know if any real help was gotten for the girls or Josh, but it doesn't appear that way to me. This is the gist of what I've read:
-About 2002, another brother saw Josh molesting one of his victims and told his father, who told his church; I think then some type of an admission happened.
-About 2003, it happened again, so he was brought to help in the construction of a building, which initially was said to be "counseling."
-Also about 2003, Josh was brought to a sheriff who gave him a stern talking to (that sheriff is now in prison for, what, 56 years for child pornography on his computer).
-About 2006, the family was going to be on Oprah, but someone sent an anonymous letter about the molestion to Oprah's staff, and they in turn brough it to the attention of the authorities. I've read two different scenarios, one the authorities spoke to the parents, the victims and Josh, but the statute of limitations had run out, so nothing was done; and two, the father lawyered up and would not let the authorities speak to Josh.
It looks to me, like the parents didn't just hide what was going on, they protected Josh, rather than protect his victims. Saying it was a "mistake" is ludicrous to me, bc molesting someone comes from somewhere, it doesn't just happen in puberty. It happened more than once, who knows how many times, to at least five girls, that are known, some his sisters. So either Josh has an organic propensity to molest, or someone molested him. But I read nothing about the girls' recovery.
I also read the parent's said the girls forgave him. Well, little children don't really understand that type of forgiveness. And they should not be encouraged to make violating them okay, they should be encouraged to work through their own feelings. Forgiveness can come with time, but it doesn't really have anything do with the wrong doer, it has more to do with releasing what was done to you and moving forward. In any event, I again, read nothing about the girls' recovery.
I don't think the show should return in it's current format, bc they are not the family they portrayed. But I'd hate to see the victims, hopefully survivors now, be shamed by this as well, it's not there shame to bear. I hope they are okay and getting real help if they need it.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 5:40 pm
It looks to me, like the parents didn't just hide what was going on, they protected Josh, rather than protect his victims. Saying it was "mistake" is ludicrous to me, bc molesting someone comes from somewhere, it doesn't just happen in puberty.
I would "protect" my child the same way. I find that people who think children should be in the "system" haven't had a lot of experience with just how crazy the system is. We need to fix that first.
And yes, experimentation does happen naturally in puberty. Same sex, different ages, trying to read Playboys... it's quite normal to be curious. Hell, half the things that we did during puberty might now be considered molestation.
The key is to have adequate education and an open enough relationship with your kids to talk it through, as well as appropriate ways of dealing with the *incredibly* strong urges that emerge in puberty.
|
Stormie
Member
03-01-2007
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 5:54 pm
Not protecting their daughters does not protect their son.
Getting the girls and Josh real help, while ensuring the girls don't have to live in the same house and their abuser, could have happened. That doesn't require the system.
Molesting is not natural experimentation. The girls were abused. There is a difference. When the parents found out, they did not protect their daughters. The girls matter.
|
Sadiesmom
Member
03-13-2002
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 6:06 pm
I don't want to get into the whole thing here, just a reminder, that Josh's "mistake" was not on the end of peeking through a window but was on the further end, closer to but not rape. andhisparents were the parents of most of his victims as well and needed to protect them as well. Since it occurred again, they obviously failed to do that.
these are not assumptions, the detail was in the police report and the parents were the parents. The mother stated that the older children were in charge of the younger ones. These things we know.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 6:13 pm
Stormie, I agree with much of that. It is true that they should have separated Josh from the family for a time on the first incidence. But a lot of people are incredibly naive about these things. They did separate them when they found out it was continuing.
And yes, actually, getting REAL help does involve the system, because licensed therapists have a duty to report. And once something is reported, it's basically a crap shoot what will happen next - that's my experience as a former therapist.
While molesting is wrong, yes, it can be experimentation at those ages. And if not addressed, it can become obsession. The reward is incredibly satisfying and addictive. That's why education is so important.
Again, I've worked in the field (not any more), but there is a whole range of possibilities here, and we just don't have all the facts. So, we shouldn't blanketly condemn, lest we drive other young people who need help and other young victims deeper into secrecy. That's the wrong approach.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Thursday, May 28, 2015 - 6:53 pm
I must have had a different puberty, that's all I can say. And I had enough abuse pre-puberty during school hours that I could have acted out a great deal.
I would use the word "experimentation" about kids of relatively equal ages and not when one is clearly in power over the other(s). That is a line I draw. I've talked to and counselled so many women who still carry the scars of being molested by older brothers, so I really feel for these girls. And he wasn't served by being in power after this came out. Yes they sent him away, but I gather he did return.
Separation and for heaven's sake, the FIRST incidents that Jim-Bob became aware of should have caused them to STOP putting Josh in charge of younger kids or any siblings. Step up and be parents and if there are too many kids for that, well then, there are too many kids. Instead of going for records and titles for a show, parent those kids, including the girls who were "experimented on".
What I've read is that they are working on a "format" of a show without Josh, but they have lost more than one major sponsor now.
|
|
