Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Sweet Fellowship: Duggars and Friends (aka the Bates Family and Other Featured Families Thread)


Message added by Scarlett45

If a person/family was never featured on any of the Duggar shows, and is not related to the Duggar family by blood or marriage, they do not need to be discussed here..

The Politics Policy is still in effect. A participants social media is NOT an invitation to discuss their political view points. Consider if discussion of certain social media posts will cause you to violate the politics policy BEFORE you hit the "Submit Reply" button.

We may all agree that David Rodriques is quite unfortunate looking, but let's refrain from comparing human beings to apes, its got way too much of a loaded history- please review the new Inclusion Policy updated May 1, 2022 , which details guidelines around discussing body type, capabilities, physical appearance etc. Additionally, using body size as an insult is not allowed.

 

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Oldernowiser said:

She probably is determined not to be “big pregnant” 🤮 for her big day. Meaning Nurie’s wedding.

Then she’ll keep Mt. DRod in bed 24/7 until she’s pregnant.

She'll probably try to time it so that she can make the big announcement at the wedding.

  • Love 11
Link to comment
20 minutes ago, galaxychaser said:

Guess Jill’s uterus went to heaven for eternal rest. No pregnancy announcement and the baby is almost 2. 
 

Unless she plans to be pregnant with Nuri at the same time. 
 

If her uterus had departed this life, she'd be wearing black.

Jill looks like a drag queen in that photo, except drag queens look more put together. She's going to make an interesting grandmother to Nurie's blessings. 

Solid Rock is an evangelical church (not sure that's what the building in the photo is). Wonder if the Rods are on the road again. 

  • LOL 4
  • Love 2
Link to comment
5 hours ago, Picture It. Sicily said:

But a nice lightweight cardigan OVER the dress (that matches) would have made too much sense.

Jill would have looked too much like the rest of us.  I would have worn it with a cardigan. I kind of hate to admit that I like the dress.  It would have looked nice with a cardigan and the black sandals. 

  • Love 7
Link to comment

Anna Marie Hamilton Maxwell, wife of Christopher Maxwell, has been diagnosed with breast cancer! She has a lump in her breast that the doctors have been monitoring. A surgeon decided it was likely cancer. She is currently 36 weeks pregnant with baby #6. She will probably be induced soon so she can fight cancer sooner. She and Chris are asking for prayers. In this case, I can't blame them. 

Link to comment
16 hours ago, Oldernowiser said:

I do enjoy the words “solid rock” hovering above her head like that...

I wonder if they might have been at Solid Rock Church North in Lebanon Ohio. It is about 3 hrs from their new home.

Solid Rock South is in Monroe/Cincinnati. I think that is the one along I-75 with the Giant Jesus (touchdown jesus) statue that was struck by lightning and burned.

If the Rods were at the one with the replacement giant Jesus statue we surely would have seen pics.

probably not where they were since women probably wear pants and dresses not from the 80s.

Edited by crazy8s
looked at pics of Solid Rock
  • Love 4
Link to comment

I don't think what Jill wants has anything to do with her being pregnant.  I think Jill R is leaving it up to God. If she gets pregnant, she gets pregnant. Women who don't believe in contraception or family planning don't really control when they get pregnant. I think Jill has been heading towards menopause for a while and her fertility has been going down for a long time.  There's almost a three gap year between the last two. If it were up to her, she probably keep having one a year like in her twenties, but she's in her forties now. 

Edited by Temperance
  • Love 3
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Temperance said:

Anna Marie Hamilton Maxwell, wife of Christopher Maxwell, has been diagnosed with breast cancer! She has a lump in her breast that the doctors have been monitoring. A surgeon decided it was likely cancer. She is currently 36 weeks pregnant with baby #6. She will probably be induced soon so she can fight cancer sooner. She and Chris are asking for prayers. In this case, I can't blame them. 

If my MD told me he decided it was likely cancer, I'd ask for a definitive diagnosis, with test results to prove it, or get a new doctor.

  • Love 19
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

If my MD told me he decided it was likely cancer, I'd ask for a definitive diagnosis, with test results to prove it, or get a new doctor.

They are running more tests, but the surgeon says it's likely cancer and she should preparing for that possibly. 

 Here's what they actually said. 

From the Maxwell Family Blog:

"Earlier in the pregnancy, a small lump was discovered that could likely have been due to hormone changes and weaning. Our doctor has been monitoring it and we’ve done some imaging. Over the past weeks, it has been growing rapidly and showing concerning characteristics. These past few days, we’ve consulted with a number of physicians and health experts, and are setting up appointments to consult with more. On Wednesday, a surgeon who reviewed our case and imaging said he has no doubt it is breast cancer. While we are still waiting on pathology and would welcome news to the contrary, it seems 99% sure that we are dealing with an urgent and very serious health issue."

Edited by Temperance
  • Useful 5
Link to comment
57 minutes ago, Sew Sumi said:

I hope Scamaritan pays for her treatments. 

Seriously that is an issue. I’ve written about my son with cancer. His treatment isn’t experimental and he has paid for real health insurance - the best policy he could find - and it is still stressful every single time waiting for each treatment to be precertified. I hate the beliefs of these people but hope she can get what she needs. 

  • Love 17
Link to comment

Does anyone here keep up with the Ardnt family?  They were originally on kids by the Dozen and had umpteen boys and one girl named "Wizzy".  The dad is batshit crazy and the mother wears frosted lip gloss and short skirts.  The oldest of the boys is in his thirties (I think) and none of them are married or even dating.  I always found them rather fascinating.  

  • Love 7
Link to comment
On 1/9/2020 at 2:34 AM, 3 is enough said:

Who puts dark red nail polish on a 20 month old?  

Well , Janessa is too young to write pretend essays about how SEVERELY  Mama loves her so she has to pretend paint her nails JUST like Mama . 

  • Useful 1
  • LOL 12
  • Love 2
Link to comment
4 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

If my MD told me he decided it was likely cancer, I'd ask for a definitive diagnosis, with test results to prove it, or get a new doctor.

According to the blog, she's had a biopsy and they're waiting for the final report, but the surgeon who did the biopsy was '99% sure' it was malignant.  I'd trust the surgeon's opinion.  Also, her story of having found a small lump early in the pregnancy that suddenly began growing rapidly is kinda classic for breast cancer, especially those that are hormone receptor positive.  I expect that, once the biopsy is back, she will be induced immediately if it is positive.  If the lump was really that big, she may need radiation and/or chemo before they can do definitive surgery.   Ann Marie has had a lot of back luck healthwise, she could use our prayers.

I also hope they have something better than Samaritan.  Ann Marie has high risk pregnancies and she delivers in the hospital; so I expect they do.  From what I understand, Samaritan spends X number of dollars each month paying claims.  They have some sort of board who reviews the current claims and chooses those that are most worthy, in their opinion.  So, one month they could pay her chemo and the next month have too many applications and decide she's not 'needy' enough.  It's Russian roulette disguise\ as health care.

Edited by doodlebug
  • Useful 3
  • Love 7
Link to comment

Anna Marie has rarely been sick and has always had homebirths. 

It might be recommended that she takes a drug that surpresses hormones if this cancer is hormone related.  A friend of mine who's a breast cancer survivor takes a drug to reduce her hormones.  Of course that might throw her into early menopause and risk her not having more babies, so they may be against that kind of treatment. 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 3
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Temperance said:

Anna Marie has rarely been sick and has always had homebirths. 

It might be recommended that she takes a drug that surpresses hormones if this cancer is hormone related.  A friend of mine who's a breast cancer survivor takes a drug to reduce her hormones.  Of course that might throw her into early menopause and risk her not having more babies, so they may be against that kind of treatment. 

I was just piping in to say the same thing. I don’t know the Maxwells, but I do know breast cancer. If she had a hormone receptor positive type, they’ll want to shut down her ovaries for five or even ten years. I don’t envy her position at all. Breast cancer is hard enough, being post partum is hard enough, and then she has factor in her religion - that’s tough.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I had estrogen positive breast cancer many  years after a total hysterectomy and I still took the hormone suppressor pill for 10 years.  No telling what her treatment will be.  PS I also had a lumpectomy and radiation.  And I still worry before every mammogram.

  • Useful 9
  • Love 1
Link to comment
8 hours ago, BigBingerBro said:

Does anyone here keep up with the Ardnt family?  They were originally on kids by the Dozen and had umpteen boys and one girl named "Wizzy".  The dad is batshit crazy and the mother wears frosted lip gloss and short skirts.  The oldest of the boys is in his thirties (I think) and none of them are married or even dating.  I always found them rather fascinating.  

I remember them. The sons are all court reporters. The daughter is the youngest and must be in her twenties by now. I'm guessing she's either a SAHD or a court reporter. The entire family comes across as level-10 weird. 

  • Love 4
Link to comment
11 hours ago, Sew Sumi said:

@doodlebug, you're confusing Anna Marie with Melanie. The latter has had difficult pregnancies and hospital births. Anna Marie is born to breed and has had home births to date. 

And no, I doubt they have coverage beyond Scamaritan.

Oh, you’re right, I stand corrected and I think you’re also correct that they probably don’t have decent insurance.  The blog does say she has consulted multiple specialists and had testing including ‘imaging’ (probably ultrasound) throughout the pregnancy; so maybe Stevehovah deems her useful enough to cover the bills.  For some reason, I think Daddy Steve is sitting on a pile of cash and sometimes loosens the pursestrings and covers their bills. I picture moths flying out of the purse first.  And a 20 minute stern lecture from Steve on their free spending ways expecting medical care and all.

Ann Marie is pregnant and the eligibility requirements for Medicaid are much lower in that circumstance, so they might qualify for that but I would imagine Steve would disown them.  They also might qualify for free care as any hospital getting government funds, which is virtually all of them, is required to provide free care to the indigent.  Based on their income and number of dependents, they might qualify.  I think that is how Gil Bates decided to let the ER be their family physician, they probably met the income level for a 100% write off.

Edited by doodlebug
I can never see the typos before I post
  • Useful 1
  • Love 9
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Marshmallow Mollie said:

I was just piping in to say the same thing. I don’t know the Maxwells, but I do know breast cancer. If she had a hormone receptor positive type, they’ll want to shut down her ovaries for five or even ten years. I don’t envy her position at all. Breast cancer is hard enough, being post partum is hard enough, and then she has factor in her religion - that’s tough.

If she needs chemo, and based on the post I expect she will, she may well go into premature menopause anyway; so the point will be moot.  Also, it seems like her pregnancy may have caused the tumor to grow rapidly. Another pregnancy could probably hasten her death with or without Tamoxifen/Nolvadex.  If her tumor is receptor positive, they may well recommend removing both of her ovaries ASAP anyway because of her age.  If they think that God expects them to hasten their own deaths rather than properly treat an aggressive cancer; they need to find a.new God.

  • Useful 4
  • Love 19
Link to comment
28 minutes ago, doodlebug said:

If she needs chemo, and based on the post I expect she will, she may well go into premature menopause anyway; so the point will be moot.  Also, it seems like her pregnancy may have caused the tumor to grow rapidly. Another pregnancy could probably hasten her death with or without Tamoxifen/Nolvadex.  If her tumor is receptor positive, they may well recommend removing both of her ovaries ASAP anyway because of her age.  If they think that God expects them to hasten their own deaths rather than properly treat an aggressive cancer; they need to find a.new God.

Yes. A reasonable god would tell her to do her best to remain here and take care of the six children she has. An unreasonable god would tell her to carry on producing an army of christian warriors whatever the consequences. I guess we'll eventually see what the priorities are. 

Link to comment
On 1/6/2020 at 8:34 PM, becca3891 said:

I grew up in a very Evangelical/fundy church, Reformed Presbyterian (not to be confused with the mainstream Presbyterian Church of America) and it directly sponsors missionaries, but I'm sure many churches do it differently.

Correction: PCA is pretty darn conservative. For example, they still do not allow women in leadership, which goes along with most evangelical/fundy outfits (recent position paper states tehy aim to 'foster a robust complementarian position and practice that creates a culture which welcomes and encourages the ministry of women in 26 the PCA in ways that are consistent with the Bible's teaching, as expressed in our confession 27 and polity," i.e., little ladies, stay in your seats and let the men do the work. Link: http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/studies/2017_WSMC.pdf). Also anti-abortion, anti-homosexuality, In many ways it would be a perfectly acceptable denomination for the Rods, Bates, etc. It's the Presbyterian Church USA that is mainstream/liberal.

  • Useful 4
  • Love 5
Link to comment

 

2 hours ago, LilJen said:

Correction: PCA is pretty darn conservative. For example, they still do not allow women in leadership, which goes along with most evangelical/fundy outfits (recent position paper states tehy aim to 'foster a robust complementarian position and practice that creates a culture which welcomes and encourages the ministry of women in 26 the PCA in ways that are consistent with the Bible's teaching, as expressed in our confession 27 and polity," i.e., little ladies, stay in your seats and let the men do the work. Link: http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/studies/2017_WSMC.pdf). Also anti-abortion, anti-homosexuality, In many ways it would be a perfectly acceptable denomination for the Rods, Bates, etc. It's the Presbyterian Church USA that is mainstream/liberal.

Yes, Presbyterian Church USA is the more liberal denomination.  It is the denomination I belong to. We have had women in leadership roles, including as clergy for many years.

  • Useful 4
  • Love 2
Link to comment
18 hours ago, lookeyloo said:

Seriously that is an issue. I’ve written about my son with cancer. His treatment isn’t experimental and he has paid for real health insurance - the best policy he could find - and it is still stressful every single time waiting for each treatment to be precertified. I hate the beliefs of these people but hope she can get what she needs. 

I know 4 families on Samaritan...the older man 60ish...diagnosed with lymphoma...paid it all...and people sent extra money to help with his lymposmal vitamin c tx...he has been cancer free 2 years...and as far as I know none of the other family members had to pay anything.... 

  • Useful 4
  • Love 1
Link to comment
16 hours ago, doodlebug said:

According to the blog, she's had a biopsy and they're waiting for the final report, but the surgeon who did the biopsy was '99% sure' it was malignant.  I'd trust the surgeon's opinion.  Also, her story of having found a small lump early in the pregnancy that suddenly began growing rapidly is kinda classic for breast cancer, especially those that are hormone receptor positive.  I expect that, once the biopsy is back, she will be induced immediately if it is positive.  If the lump was really that big, she may need radiation and/or chemo before they can do definitive surgery.   Ann Marie has had a lot of back luck healthwise, she could use our prayers.

I also hope they have something better than Samaritan.  Ann Marie has high risk pregnancies and she delivers in the hospital; so I expect they do.  From what I understand, Samaritan spends X number of dollars each month paying claims.  They have some sort of board who reviews the current claims and chooses those that are most worthy, in their opinion.  So, one month they could pay her chemo and the next month have too many applications and decide she's not 'needy' enough.  It's Russian roulette disguise\ as health care.

another option for her is to divorce her husband...with kids she would qualify for everything free...this is what happened to my cousin...she actually divorced her husband to get the treatment she needed...they just lived together...what a sad world we live in where basic healthcare is based on such things....

  • Love 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Dimi1 said:

I know 4 families on Samaritan...the older man 60ish...diagnosed with lymphoma...paid it all...and people sent extra money to help with his lymposmal vitamin c tx...he has been cancer free 2 years...and as far as I know none of the other family members had to pay anything.... 

I'm glad to hear that.  The general info online indicates that bills are to be paid by the patient and their family and then submitted to the plan which pays them back according to how much money they have in their coffers at that particular time; so it is possible that claims will not be covered if the healthshare doesn't have the money on hand.  The patient and family are also told to approach their medical providers, tell them their story and beg for discounts and monthly payment plans.

 I have encountered this back when I was in private practice and agreed to a plan for time payments and discounts  in dozens of cases.  Every single time, the payments stopped in less than 6 months and I never came close to getting paid.  A woman whose ectopic pregnancy I operated on in the middle of the night approached me with a sad tale of how she was a devout Christian and loved Jesus but couldn't pay the bill.  I wrote off half the fee and told her to send me 5 bucks a month and we'd be fine.  She cried, thanked me profusely, told me Jesus loved me and she would pray for me.  I never saw a dime.  Hence my skepticism.

One thing Samaritan is NOT is health insurance in that there are no guaranteed payments for anything.  It is a 'healthshare' where the participants pool their premiums and reimburse each other for medical expenses within certain paramenters.  Of course, they refuse outright to cover contraception including tubal ligations, genetic testing, etc and the members are required to be practicing Christians who don't smoke or use drugs.  Most don't cover prescriptions and pre-existing conditions are often excluded

.https://www.healthmarkets.com/resources/supplemental-health-insurance/christian-healthcare/

 

Edited by doodlebug
  • Useful 11
  • Love 2
Link to comment

My only knowledge of Samaritan comes from it being discussed as an insurance option at a former job, which was a Crhistian company.

A family who worked there--and who used the ER as a clinic 🙄--were angered about our real health insurance for reasons unfathomable to the rest of us and tried to talk the president of the company into switching to Samaritan.

And the rest of us rebelled. Between those of us who didn't attend church on the sly, those who smoked, and those who had pre-existing conditions or had dependents and/or spouses with chronic, complicated health conditions, almost nobody would have been eligible. 

Incidentally that family who fought for us to have Samaritan and got slapped down over it is now dealing with an aggressive case of cancer in their family. They are using traditional medical treatments, which is a relief since I wondered if they'd reject that, but I can't help but wonder what they think now about Samaritan versus the insurance they have that they didn't want. 

Edited by Zella
  • Useful 1
  • Love 12
Link to comment

There was a recent article in the New York Times about Christian health care sharing organizations. Samaritan Ministries advises its members that “there is no coverage, no guarantee of coverage.” And apparently no legal recourse for members to appeal when bills are not covered. Insurance regulators in several states are looking into these types of companies. 

  • Useful 6
  • Love 4
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Dimi1 said:

I know 4 families on Samaritan...the older man 60ish...diagnosed with lymphoma...paid it all...and people sent extra money to help with his lymposmal vitamin c tx...he has been cancer free 2 years...and as far as I know none of the other family members had to pay anything.... 

Okay, but the plural of anecdote is not data. It sounds like the company itself acknowledges that it won’t cover everyone. I hope very much that a young mother with six children isn’t depending on them to keep her alive.

  • Love 13
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Dimi1 said:

another option for her is to divorce her husband...with kids she would qualify for everything free...this is what happened to my cousin...she actually divorced her husband to get the treatment she needed...they just lived together...what a sad world we live in where basic healthcare is based on such things....

That is too simplistic.  Eligibility for any free health care, normally called Medicaid for low income individuals, is very complicated and need based on income and assets.  And depending on your state, it can take forever to get those benefits except in situations of disability.  If the father was living with the children, I don't understand this scenario at all.  Sorry.

 

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, fonfereksglen said:

That is too simplistic.  Eligibility for any free health care, normally called Medicaid for low income individuals, is very complicated and need based on income and assets.  And depending on your state, it can take forever to get those benefits except in situations of disability.  If the father was living with the children, I don't understand this scenario at all.  Sorry.

 

The story of a couple having to divorce so that the wife can get Medicaid is basically an urban legend at this point.   Seems like a lot of people know someone who knows someone who did this.  Well, I am in the healthcare for more than 35 years now, have taken care of well over 10,000 patients and have NEVER encountered a single one who needed to divorce their spouse to get government healthcare.  It's like the unicorn, everyone has heard of it, but it's never been seen, IMO.

  • Useful 9
  • LOL 1
  • Love 7
Link to comment

It's quite a bit likely that anyone divorcing to get Medicaid yet still living in the same home is committing fraud especially if they don't fill out the forms correctly listing the income of all the household members, the in-kind income received, etc.  That helps confirm it's unicorn like nature.

  • Love 5
Link to comment
1 hour ago, doodlebug said:

The story of a couple having to divorce so that the wife can get Medicaid is basically an urban legend at this point.   Seems like a lot of people know someone who knows someone who did this.  Well, I am in the healthcare for more than 35 years now, have taken care of well over 10,000 patients and have NEVER encountered a single one who needed to divorce their spouse to get government healthcare.  It's like the unicorn, everyone has heard of it, but it's never been seen, IMO.

/raises hand slowly

 

I did this.  I am disabled and was going to lose medicaid and SSI because my husband got a raise of 10 cent, and we could not afford the insurance that was offered (which is so bad that it did not meet Obamacare requirements, so we would have paid a couple hundred a month for insurance and still been fined).  We got divorced, I kept my benefits and my husband still is uninsured.  

Link to comment
1 hour ago, ouinason said:

/raises hand slowly

 

I did this.  I am disabled and was going to lose medicaid and SSI because my husband got a raise of 10 cent, and we could not afford the insurance that was offered (which is so bad that it did not meet Obamacare requirements, so we would have paid a couple hundred a month for insurance and still been fined).  We got divorced, I kept my benefits and my husband still is uninsured.  

I’m really sorry to hear this. It is plain wrong.

  • Love 9
Link to comment

Health insurance is super complicated and so is SSI and SSDI.

There are all these nuances to who qualifies for what and who can be subsidised or not. For couples who are married, most often it comes down to the cost of the employed spouse's premium cost compared to household income. I believe the threshold is around 10%. Meaning if the employed spouse's contribution to their employer offered health insurance is over 10% of their income, the unemployed spouse is eligible for state subsidized insurance.

Anyone receiving SSI or SSDI is eligible for medicaid or medicare, and sometimes both. If a spouse is receiving SSI their spouse's income can affect the amount received. If a spouse is receiving SSDI, their spouse's income does not matter.

So it really isn't one size fits all, because like I mentioned above, of all the nuances that change with different circumstances. 

 

 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 6
Link to comment
19 hours ago, LilJen said:

Correction: PCA is pretty darn conservative. For example, they still do not allow women in leadership, which goes along with most evangelical/fundy outfits (recent position paper states tehy aim to 'foster a robust complementarian position and practice that creates a culture which welcomes and encourages the ministry of women in 26 the PCA in ways that are consistent with the Bible's teaching, as expressed in our confession 27 and polity," i.e., little ladies, stay in your seats and let the men do the work. Link: http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/studies/2017_WSMC.pdf). Also anti-abortion, anti-homosexuality, In many ways it would be a perfectly acceptable denomination for the Rods, Bates, etc. It's the Presbyterian Church USA that is mainstream/liberal.

I meant to say PCUSA -- and there is a HUGE difference there, yes. I was sleepy and shouldn't have made that mistake, as the Reformed Presbyterian Church I grew up in was almost identical to the PCA.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
17 hours ago, Liddy52 said:

 

Yes, Presbyterian Church USA is the more liberal denomination.  It is the denomination I belong to. We have had women in leadership roles, including as clergy for many years.

Yup, I blew it and should have known better, as when I was growing up, the PCUSA was held up as this horrible, evil church and an example of "what happens when churches get too liberal and don't follow the bible." LOL! The RPCNA in which I grew up is doctrinally just like the PCA, but the RPCNA also believes in singing exclusively Psalms, a capella. 

My point about missionaries still stands, though. Many churches do sponsor missionaries and I don't see how the Rods could put even their meager meals on the table and pay the bills without sponsorship of some kind.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Message added by Scarlett45

If a person/family was never featured on any of the Duggar shows, and is not related to the Duggar family by blood or marriage, they do not need to be discussed here..

The Politics Policy is still in effect. A participants social media is NOT an invitation to discuss their political view points. Consider if discussion of certain social media posts will cause you to violate the politics policy BEFORE you hit the "Submit Reply" button.

We may all agree that David Rodriques is quite unfortunate looking, but let's refrain from comparing human beings to apes, its got way too much of a loaded history- please review the new Inclusion Policy updated May 1, 2022 , which details guidelines around discussing body type, capabilities, physical appearance etc. Additionally, using body size as an insult is not allowed.

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...