S10.E09: Kody's Secret Plan

[laurakaye]

9 hours ago, LuvMyShows said:

But did I hear correctly one of them say it was just luck that the yellow box Sol pulled out happened to be what he put in?  Meaning, that the little boxes weren't labeled as to which child put it in?  SMH.

This part was weird - why was there a watch in the time capsule?  And why did it belong to Sol, who was a baby when the Browns made this stupid capsule?  I mean, why would anyone put a working watch in a time capsule and then declare that it belonged to a child?  Unless it was like a Barney watch or something, I wasn't paying that close of attention (even though I was the recapper, LOL).

[Sandy W]

1 minute ago, laurakaye said:

This part was weird - why was there a watch in the time capsule?  And why did it belong to Sol, who was a baby when the Browns made this stupid capsule?  I mean, why would anyone put a working watch in a time capsule and then declare that it belonged to a child?  Unless it was like a Barney watch or something, I wasn't paying that close of attention (even though I was the recapper, LOL).

One of Kody's many indulgences is his watch collection.  I don't think any of them are in the Rolex or Phillipe Patek category, like his collection of wives, he goes for quantity over quality.

By selecting a watch for Sol as his contribution to the time capsule, Kody was expressing his expectation that Sol would become a chip off the old (Inca)bloc.

[TurtlePower]

1 hour ago, llewis823 said:

So for the second week in a row, I watched the 2 hour episode (with about an hour of new footage) in multiple viewing sessions. I finished watching this episode last night. The thing that just drives me bonkers is that they all keep changing their stories about the why and when of HAVING to move. Janelle said that this was their "most deliberate move to date". (Man, if that is your deliberate, I'd sure hate to see what your spur of the moment is!!) And when Christine was talking to Aspyn about the move - she basically told her it was probably going to be a year before they were done with the build of the new houses. (And here we are almost a year later...nuthin') but went on to say that Flagstaff will probably not be their last move - that they'll probably move again in about 5 years! So that means all of this uprooting, money and stress for what she thinks will be about 4 years, when we don't even know if they've starting building yet and the first year is almost over already so all of this for about 3 years??? 

I just keep looking at their situation in the cuddle-sac in LV. It was the perfect solution - they were all within walking distance to each other yet each wife had their own personal space. And if they had those balloon mortgages or whatever they were, couldn't they have tried to refinance or just paid them and still be out less money than they are in all that moving. I truly think this was all for drama for the show to keep them on the air. I'm betting we get at least one more season seeing them with all the building problems, kids settling in problems and one kid will probably be getting married - it's about that time.

Yeah, maybe one more at best. To me it feels like this show has run its course. I fast-forwarded through a good chunk of this episode (don't give a shit about the stupid wedding) and found myself bored with it all. 

I still think Flagstaff is a place for them to settle in post-show, away from the crowding, crazies and grumpiness of Vegas. Vegas may be good for homebuyers but there are lots of things people don't figure out until they've been there a while (there's a nut near to where the Browns used to live threatening to kill people and scaring the residents). Common theme throughout the city. 

I feel like they amped up the drama for the show. Those Vegas homes will eventually sell and the Browns will need a nice, quiet place. Question is, will Meri stick around?  

[Elizzikra]

Quote

And if they had those balloon mortgages or whatever they were, couldn't they have tried to refinance or just paid them and still be out less money than they are in all that moving.

I don't really know a lot about the Browns or about mortgages but here is what I think they did...

It's not exactly a balloon mortgage. I think they have an adjustable rate mortgage, which means that they paid whatever downpayment they paid and had a very low interest rate for the first 5 - 7 years.  This gives you a low monthly payment in the first 5-7 years and for many people, was supposed to enable them to buy more house than they would have been able to with a traditional, fixed rate mortgage (where the interest rate is set at the time of sale and doesn't change). Then those interest rates shoot up and that substantially increases your monthly payment. The idea was supposed to be that the property would continue to increase in value and that the economy would remain robust and people's incomes also would increase.

This is how a lot of people lost their homes. When they hit that time that the interest rates went up, often they would learn that their properties had not increased in value (or in many cases, had actually lost value). So they can't sell the houses without having to come up with a chunk of money to pay off whatever remains of the loan that the sale price of the house doesn't cover. If their incomes hadn't risen, they couldn't afford the new, higher monthly payments. So houses go into foreclosure.

For the Browns to refinance, a bunch of things would have to happen. First and foremost, their lender has to agree to refinance the loans. They might - but many lenders don't because the properties haven't risen in value and may actually be worth less than the amount of the original loan. Their credit scores may not be high enough to qualify them for a new loan. And if they have multiple mortgages on a single property, they may already be as leveraged as they can possibly be. And I don't know how a lender would evaluate their financial picture given that their primary source of income seems to be a tv show that may or may not last another season. 

Second, if they can get new loans approved, they will likely still have to come up with a chunk of cash as I think that you have to pay closing costs around the new loans. No idea how much those are but they aren't small change.

Honestly, I can't see how they keep this financial house of cards afloat, much less put anything aside for when the tv money is no longer coming in. They have to be in hock up to their eyeballs.

[Mothra]

On 3/26/2019 at 1:04 PM, xwordfanatik said:

Sorry about the quote box above--not quite sure how that happened.

Anyway, as far as I can remember, this was the first time on-air that Kody mentioned that ?Hayden? was going to go to college in/near Flagstaff.  So now all the complaining and wondering why by the other kids is building up to "so we're *all* being torn out of our schools/friends/sports at an awkward time in our lives just so that Robyn can live near Hayden while he's in college?"  I think it's striking that as far as we've been shown, none of the other children have been told that Hayden has been accepted at NAU, or whatever it is.  A really good show would reveal what the other children's reactions were when this tidbit was revealed to them.

I have no doubt that Kody is itchin' to move just because he's never satisfied, that they need to unload those expensive McMansions at the top of the market, but I think the actual reason for the move is so that Robyn can hold Hayden's hand during his college career, and I think that will infuriate the other children.  Some of the other wives were willing to stick around in Vegas to allow the kids to finish high school--why can't Robyn move to Flagstaff ahead of the rest--and btw, if Hayden really needs that kind of support to succeed in college, a) maybe college isn't for him and/or b) he's not receiving the kinds of supports he should be receiving from the school itself.  I am a bad person for even thinking this, but the fact that Kody divorced Meri so he could adopt Robyn's older children (including Hayden) seems to me to be favoring a child/mother who came late to the rodeo over the kids/moms who were there from the beginning.

Did Kody (and the other wives) know about Hayden's disability before they welcomed Robyn into the family?  Since "fairness" seems to matter so much, was there any discussion about how Hayden's special needs would affect time and effort expended on the other kids?  Siblings of kids with disabilities have their own burdens in terms of being cheated of parental care, no matter how hard parents work to provide every child what she needs.  I'm not suggesting that Robyn should have been excluded from consideration for sister-wife because her son has special needs; I'm wondering if they really considered what it would mean for all of them, Kody, wives and children to bring in a child who would need and should receive extra attention.  Did they discuss how they would handle making sure no child felt neglected or second-class because she could not receive the parental time and attention she would need?  I'm betting that they didn't, that Kody was on total dick-drive, and the other wives had no idea how their children's lives might be affected by Hayden's needs.

And perhaps the worst part for siblings of children with disabilities is that they can't even allow themselves to be mad about it!  They love their sibling, and they understand that it's not the sibling's fault, so the hurt and anger have to remain unexpressed.  I'm betting we'll see no overt resentment when they learn they're having to move so Hayden's mother can be near him when he is in college, but that the inevitable depression caused by this double bind they're in will come out at some later time in their lives. 

This should have been handled so much more carefully and sensitively.  Making Hayden's needs a secret reason for the move is just about the worst thing they could've done, both to Hayden and to the other kids.  Stupid fuckers.

ETA  Dayton.  Thanks, Elizzikra.

Edited March 27, 2019 by Mothra
wrong name

[xwordfanatik]

1 hour ago, Sandy W said:

One of Kody's many indulgences is his watch collection.  I don't think any of them are in the Rolex or Phillipe Patek category, like his collection of wives, he goes for quantity over quality.

By selecting a watch for Sol as his contribution to the time capsule, Kody was expressing his expectation that Sol would become a chip off the old (Inca)bloc.

We actually have a watch channel on Spectrum cable.  Crazy.  Yes, Kootie always carted King Sol around like a growth around his neck, for years.  Now it seems like even Sol has turned against him, and thinks dad's a gigantic pain in the ass.  Sooner or later, the boys have all basically figured out that dad is a joke!

[Elizzikra]

Quote

?Hayden?

Dayton

[xwordfanatik]

23 minutes ago, Elizzikra said:

Dayton

Or as Robyn says, Day-un.

[Tabbygirl521]

3 hours ago, ginger90 said:

Wanting and needing, seem to have the same definition for this family.

Kody’s wanting = all of them needing

[Gennacide]

I visited in the middle of August.  I was 17. It was 9 years ago on a road trip from NY to L.A.  with my Aunt and sister.  We stopped to see the Grand Canyon, Colorado, etc.  I guess I'm sensitive to the heat. ☺

[Sandy W]

29 minutes ago, Gennacide said:

I visited in the middle of August.  I was 17. It was 9 years ago on a road trip from NY to L.A.  with my Aunt and sister.  We stopped to see the Grand Canyon, Colorado, etc.  I guess I'm sensitive to the heat. ☺

I think you may have just caught a bad day there.  I have spent a lot of time visiting various parts of Az and although it was hot, managed to catch a small breeze to alleviate the heat.  I live in the Toronto area, very similar to the humidity you experience in NYC...now that's what I call uncomfortable, heat + humidity = oppressive to me.

[FreemefromTV]

It’s pretty alarming when you have Aspyn as the voice of reason. In her talking head she said was just as confused as everyone else and hit the nail on the head when she said...Robyn thinks this is going to be a permanent move, my mom thinks we’ll move again and in 2 years my dad will find something wrong and want to live again!! The adults all need to get together and figure out what they want for their future. 

The adults in this family are unbelievable! When your child is saying they are just glad they are out of the house because of your ridiculous choices, it’s not a ringing endorsement for this lifestyle.

Overall, I feel Christine is the least offensive wife. However, she has to be the dumbest as well! When she was talking to Aspyn, she says that there are pros and cons to moving and the only two cons for Flagstaff is that it’s much more expensive and far away from all the kids. Ummm...those seem like two BIG cons. She then says Vegas is the perfect set up for them but Flagstaff feels like home. This family might think of themselves as expert salesmen but I’m not buying what they are selling!

[Sandy W]

3 minutes ago, FreemefromTV said:

It’s pretty alarming when you have Aspyn as the voice of reason. In her talking head she said was just as confused as everyone else and hit the nail on the head when she said...Robyn thinks this is going to be a permanent move, my mom thinks we’ll move again and in 2 years my dad will find something wrong and want to live again!! The adults all need to get together and figure out what they want for their future. 

The adults in this family are unbelievable! When your child is saying they are just glad they are out of the house because of your ridiculous choices, it’s not a ringing endorsement for this lifestyle.

Overall, I feel Christine is the least offensive wife. However, she has to be the dumbest as well! When she was talking to Aspyn, she says that there are pros and cons to moving and the only two cons for Flagstaff is that it’s much more expensive and far away from all the kids. Ummm...those seem like two BIG cons. She then says Vegas is the perfect set up for them but Flagstaff feels like home. This family might think of themselves as expert salesmen but I’m not buying what they are selling!

Right!  Flagstaff felt like home after spending 5 or 6 hours there and hearing Kody declare it yummy, that's all it took for Christine to keep (syrupy) sweet.

[Tuxcat]

Curious if any of the wives would have legal standing if they walked away from the family? I assume none would qualify for spousal support since they aren't legal wives except for Robyn? 

Arizona I believe recognizes common law marriages (Utah and Nevada do not) but 1) they don't satisfy the living together requirement I don't think and 2) he's already legally married to Robyn.

Wonder if they ever draw up contractual papers amongst themselves to remove this dangling question.

Also, is anyone else annoyed by Christine's 2 levels of voice? Either she's enthusiastically bellowing or she's using that vocal fry. I find the latter very irritating especially.

[Twopper]

4 hours ago, TurtlePower said:

I feel like they amped up the drama for the show. Those Vegas homes will eventually sell and the Browns will need a nice, quiet place. Question is, will Meri stick around?  

Only if they need her for another season.   I am not sure what's the point of her hanging around otherwise.  She has an empty nest.  Everyone else still has a few children in school, and Christine and Janelle will probably soon have lots of grandchildren.  There is a good chance Mariah may not ever be a mother, but even if she does, I doubt she will have more than 1 or 2.   Even if she and Kody were to rekindle their love ( not that I think there is much chance of that) I still don't see her hanging around much with the rest of the fambly other than perhaps showing up for Thanksgiving dinner, weddings, and funerals.

During one of the discussions around the dinner table after the kids were dismissed, Kody mentions they will be a great deal of financial trouble if the LV houses don't sell.  So far they haven't sold, but Christine has bought a house and everyone else is in rentals, and they have bought that land.  But I don't hear anything of financial trouble so far, and it has been about 8 months since the big move.  His comment doesn't make it sound like they are richer than we think they are, but then we haven't seen any evidence so far of not being able to afford what they bought.  

[Sandy W]

4 minutes ago, Tuxcat said:

Curious if any of the wives would have legal standing if they walked away from the family? I assume none would qualify for spousal support since they aren't legal wives except for Robyn? 

Arizona I believe recognizes common law marriages (Utah and Nevada do not) but 1) they don't satisfy the living together requirement I don't think and 2) he's already legally married to Robyn.

Wonder if they ever draw up contractual papers amongst themselves to remove this dangling question.

Also, is anyone else annoyed by Christine's 2 levels of voice? Either she's enthusiastically bellowing or she's using that vocal fry. I find the latter very irritating especially.

If the primary source of income is TLC, their incomes would probably be balanced if the funds are distributed equally, so no spousal support would be awarded.  Minor or dependent children would be eligible for support unless 50/50 physical custody is in play.   If they did satisfy the common law living requirement, Meri could possibly be liable for spousal support to Kody, considering her income for LLR. As far as distribution of family assets, all the LV homes are in joint title I believe, it's a little more complicated with the deeds on the Flagstaff properties. 

DISCLAIMER:  My opinions are based only on where I live and the experiences of people I know.

[Alapaki]

34 minutes ago, Tuxcat said:

Curious if any of the wives would have legal standing if they walked away from the family? I assume none would qualify for spousal support since they aren't legal wives except for Robyn? 

Arizona I believe recognizes common law marriages (Utah and Nevada do not) but 1) they don't satisfy the living together requirement I don't think and 2) he's already legally married to Robyn.

Wonder if they ever draw up contractual papers amongst themselves to remove this dangling question.

Also, is anyone else annoyed by Christine's 2 levels of voice? Either she's enthusiastically bellowing or she's using that vocal fry. I find the latter very irritating especially.

I don’t believe any wife other than Robyn would have any ligal rights (Kody’s biological children have the right to child support, but they’d be better off being supported by the plague-ridden prairie dogs). 

That’s the difference between “decriminalization” and “legal recognition”.  The LGBT community worked on ways to draft private agreements to accomplish things that the laws didn’t permit.  Open up the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples was easy compared to what would be involved with legal recognition of plural marriages  

oh, and re: Christine’s voice?  Same. 

[Jeanne222]

Moo opinion is that kody will never be satisfied until he returns to Utah and Arizona is just a rest stop for the tribe!  I look for him to make a move in getting bills passed to allow his lifestyle!

[AZChristian]

1 hour ago, Tuxcat said:

Curious if any of the wives would have legal standing if they walked away from the family? I assume none would qualify for spousal support since they aren't legal wives except for Robyn? 

Arizona I believe recognizes common law marriages (Utah and Nevada do not) but 1) they don't satisfy the living together requirement I don't think and 2) he's already legally married to Robyn.

Wonder if they ever draw up contractual papers amongst themselves to remove this dangling question.

Also, is anyone else annoyed by Christine's 2 levels of voice? Either she's enthusiastically bellowing or she's using that vocal fry. I find the latter very irritating especially.

If Utah and Nevada do not recognize common law marriages, Arizona won't recognize any of the Browns' marriages as common law.  Besides, to have a valid common law marriage in most (if not all) states, the parties have to be legally able to have a common law marriage . . . which means they cannot be legally married to anyone else.

I did find a lawyer website that says, "Further, while Arizona does not recognize common-law marriage, parties who have resided together may have remedies in contract law to receive reimbursement for property purchased together and similar claims."

I'm not sure that 25% of the time with each wife (if it were even still that even division) qualifies as Kody "living with" the three to whom he is not married.  

[Elizzikra]

Quote

the only two cons for Flagstaff is that it’s much more expensive and far away from all the kids. 

Particularly when the patriarch's stated argument for moving was to save money...

[deirdra]

7 hours ago, Sandy W said:

One of Kody's many indulgences is his watch collection.  I don't think any of them are in the Rolex or Phillipe Patek category, like his collection of wives, he goes for quantity over quality.

By selecting a watch for Sol as his contribution to the time capsule, Kody was expressing his expectation that Sol would become a chip off the old (Inca)bloc.

For his birthday or fathers day in the first year or two all the kids pooled their money to get Kody a watch.  He tried it on but never wore it - I wonder if that was the one he donated to Sol.  Kody explained that he had to wear expensive watches while driving his sports car so that his clients would know he is a successful marketer.

34 minutes ago, Elizzikra said:

Particularly when the patriarch's stated argument for moving was to save money...

and that the family must go together

[jumper sage]

2 hours ago, Alapaki said:

That’s the difference between “decriminalization” and “legal recognition”.

That is exactly what is wrong with polyg marriage, the children are not protected.

2 hours ago, Sandy W said:

Minor or dependent children would be eligible for support unless 50/50 physical custody is in play.

I can see Kody being like my dad and refuse 50/50 custody and demand the judge throw the book at him, money wise.  He paid any amount of money, and sat their in court throwing in suggestions himself, not to be with us.  He found a great atty ......for our mother!  He didn't even bring one.  We all say that our parents divorce was the best thing to happen to us.

[Sandy W]

3 minutes ago, jumper sage said:

That is exactly what is wrong with polyg marriage, the children are not protected.

I can see Kody being l withike my dad and refuse 50/50 custody and demand the judge throw the book at him, money wise.  He paid any amount of money, and sat their in court throwing in suggestions himself, not to be with us.  He found a great atty ......for our mother!  He didn't even bring one.  We all say that our parents divorce was the best thing to happen to us.

4

That's heartbreaking Jumper Sage, but he's the loser, he'll never have those precious years and memories. 

You must have had a very strong mother, that carried you through with such a positive attitude.

[jumper sage]

1 minute ago, Sandy W said:

That's heartbreaking Jumper Sage, but he's the loser, he'll never have those precious years and memories. 

You must have had a very strong mother, that carried you through with such a positive attitude.

Heartbreaking?  No it was liberation.  We moved down the street, he paid for us FOR ONCE, and he and my mother got along great after the divorce.  He was a severe alcoholic and us kids told our mother we were leaving and would she come with us.  My dad finally agreeing to support us and leave us alone was all we ever wanted.  Living with an alcoholic was the horrible part.  She had been paying all the bills for years and he drank or bought boats etc with his.  After the divorce he would come over on Saturday mornings to have coffee with our mother and then have her give him "the tab" and he would pay her cash.  He paid for everything.  Braces, sports, skiing, motorbike racing, trips, along with his child support.  He even gave us allowance.  He would send over, from the butcher, choice cuts of meat.  It was HEAVEN.

[xwordfanatik]

1 hour ago, Elizzikra said:

Particularly when the patriarch's stated argument for moving was to save money...

And, for him saying he wants to see all his kids every day.  He got all wistful talking about Ariella, his "last child."  Pity he didn't give such thought to his 13 earlier kids, BR (before Robyn.)

[Elizzikra]

Quote

That is exactly what is wrong with polyg marriage, the children are not protected.

How do legal marriages protect children - polygamous or otherwise?

[suomi]

12 minutes ago, Elizzikra said:

How do legal marriages protect children - polygamous or otherwise?

Legal precedent for right of inheritance, to seek (if not secure) child support including education and medical costs, custody issues, Social Security survivor benefits, etc.

I'm sure those with more knowledge could add to that.

[Chris Knight]

2 hours ago, suomi said:

Legal precedent for right of inheritance, to seek (if not secure) child support including education and medical costs, custody issues, Social Security survivor benefits, etc.

I'm sure those with more knowledge could add to that.

Kody is not on the birth certificates of Janelle and Christine's children, if I'm not mistaken, so legally and on paper he has no relation to those 12 (12!) children.  I think that is how they were eligible for foodstamps because they were single women, no father to the kids.

[kicotan]

In defense of Las Vegas:

It isn’t unbearably hot ALL year.  October-May is typically very reasonable weather, especially October/November and April/May.  December, January, February and March are often rather chilly, especially at night.  This week, daytime highs range from 74-82, nighttime lows from 50-61.  June-September is very hot, but that’s just 4 months out of 12.

My theory on why the wives appear to be so vehemently opposed to living in the same house ( on the show):

Their original plot line of having to high tail it out of Utah lest they be arrested had absolutely nothing to do with Kody being “spiritually married” to 3 or 4 women.  It was all to draw attention to Utah’s specific law about COHABITATION with more than one woman, referring to them publicly as WIVES.  They made a HUGE deal about it after they left, even going so far as to file suit against the state over it.  Kody’s desire that polygamy is legitimized and ultimately legalized is important to him and his wives.

As we all know, it was and is mostly a non-issue with regards to prosecution, however, ever since then they(the wives) go out of their way to express their outright repulsion of cohabitation, in any state.

Utah statute:

Effective 5/9/2017 
76-7-101.  Bigamy -- Penalty -- Defense. 

(1)A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing the person has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry and cohabitates with the other person.

(2)Bigamy is a third degree felony.

(3)Bigamy is a second degree felony if the accused is also convicted during the same prosecution of the following:

(a)inducing marriage or bigamy under false pretenses;

(b)fraud;

(c)domestic abuse;

(d)child abuse;

(e)sexual abuse;

(f)human trafficking; or

(g)human smuggling.

(4)It is a defense to bigamy that:

(a)the accused reasonably believed the accused and the other person were legally eligible to marry;

(b)the accused is a person who, under reasonable fear of coercion or bodily harm, left a bigamous relationship as defined in Subsection (1);

(c)the accused is a minor who left a bigamous relationship as defined in Subsection (1); or

(d)the accused has taken steps to protect the safety and welfare of any minor child of a bigamous relationship.
 

Each wife having their own home for themselves and their minor children, the more ostentatious the better, gives the appearance of taking steps to protect the children’s safety and welfare.  Each of them having income producing businesses (SisterWivesCloset, Strive, Real Estate, LuLaOMGNo, etc.) also gives the appearance that the children aren’t being supported by the state through welfare.  Publicly denouncing cohabitation as NEVER going to happen as well as asserting their sassy/non-submissive personalities is basically the only defense they have to protect themselves, should they live in Utah.  I also believe that their public display is an attempt to curry favor with Kody (the guy who would sue for discrimination if he was turned down for building the plyg house of his dreams).  The more vocal and assy they are about it (looking at you, Christine), the more desirous they are of Kody’s approval and attention.

I think Kody’s a total kook for thinking that in 2019, polygamy has a chance in hell at being legally recognized.  I believe he very much wants to reap the government’s protections and benefits for his polygamous family but I don’t think that ship will sail in his lifetime, if ever.

[kicotan]

28 minutes ago, Chris Knight said:

Kody is not on the birth certificates of Janelle and Christine's children, if I'm not mistaken, so legally and on paper he has no relation to those 12 (12!) children.  I think that is how they were eligible for foodstamps because they were single women, no father to the kids.

It is my understanding that most if not all states require the single mother’s co-operation in establishing paternity, thereby opening a child-support case against the absent father.  Refusing to co-operate=no public assistance.

Also, eligibility is based on financial need, not marital status.

[LuvMyShows]

7 hours ago, FreemefromTV said:

Overall, I feel Christine is the least offensive wife. However, she has to be the dumbest as well! When she was talking to Aspyn, she says that there are pros and cons to moving and the only two cons for Flagstaff is that it’s much more expensive and far away from all the kids. Ummm...those seem like two BIG cons. 

I was absolutely floored when she said that, although I shouldn't have been.  It's like, "There are pros and cons to peanuts, and the only two cons are that I'm allergic and they make me go into anaphylactic shock.."

[MissTeacher13]

7 hours ago, kicotan said:

It is my understanding that most if not all states require the single mother’s co-operation in establishing paternity, thereby opening a child-support case against the absent father.  Refusing to co-operate=no public assistance.

Also, eligibility is based on financial need, not marital status.

This is the law in Australia as well. The birth certificate won’t be processed unless you have both parents signatures or you sign a Statutory Declaration stating you don’t know who the father is. 

[Kohola3]

10 hours ago, kicotan said:

Refusing to co-operate=no public assistance.

No social security benefits to a minor child either.  

[Desert Rat]

18 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

Curious if any of the wives would have legal standing if they walked away from the family? I assume none would qualify for spousal support since they aren't legal wives except for Robyn? 

Arizona I believe recognizes common law marriages (Utah and Nevada do not) but 1) they don't satisfy the living together requirement I don't think and 2) he's already legally married to Robyn.

Wonder if they ever draw up contractual papers amongst themselves to remove this dangling question.

Also, is anyone else annoyed by Christine's 2 levels of voice? Either she's enthusiastically bellowing or she's using that vocal fry. I find the latter very irritating especially.

Arizona does not recognize common law marriage.  Arizona would only recognize the legal marriage with Robyn.  However, Arizona doesn't care if Kody is sharing D with others. 

[Elizzikra]

Quote

Legal precedent for right of inheritance, to seek (if not secure) child support including education and medical costs, custody issues, Social Security survivor benefits, etc.

None of those are protections offered by marriage; they are protections offered by paternity. Wives in plural marriages could "protect" their children by naming the father on the birth certificate; if these wives chose not to do so, that's their error. The only way that marriage would "protect" children in these events is that in most (maybe all) states, if a child is born to a married woman, her husband is the putative birth father, whether he is the biological father or not.

In other words, the children of polygamous relationships could have the same protections as children born into monogamous marriages, it just requires slightly more effort on the part of the mother.

I actually have no issue at all with the legalization of polygamy as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult. Sure we would have to rewrite some laws and regulations - but that's what lawmakers are supposed to do. It's their job.

[B in Lee]

On ‎3‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 12:48 PM, Natalie68 said:

That doctor gave me GIANT creeps!  Talking about how pretty Ysabel was, Kody needing a shotgun.  That would be the last time I took my daughter to a doctor that mentioned how attractive my teen daughter was.  I might also let it slip was a creeper he was.  I was stunned.

I didn't get that vibe at all! He undoubtedly deals with a lot of young girls with this problem. They are already at a very tender age, feeling awkward and ugly. Add to this the problems with the scoliosis - I'm sure his remarks were to reassure her that she's NOT an ugly person. There was nothing inappropriate to it. 

[Sandy W]

11 minutes ago, B in Lee said:

I didn't get that vibe at all! He undoubtedly deals with a lot of young girls with this problem. They are already at a very tender age, feeling awkward and ugly. Add to this the problems with the scoliosis - I'm sure his remarks were to reassure her that she's NOT an ugly person. There was nothing inappropriate to it. 

Thank You!  I thought it was just me that didn't find his remarks offensive.  They seemed to be intended to reassure her and were made in the presence of her parents.

[Galloway Cave]

1 hour ago, Elizzikra said:

I actually have no issue at all with the legalization of polygamy as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult. Sure we would have to rewrite some laws and regulations - but that's what lawmakers are supposed to do. It's their job.

It would take a lot of work changing Federal laws and regulations- SS, tax laws, inheritance regulations, insurance regulations, etc. Without getting too political, our lawmakers can't even handle the everyday, regular stuff right now. Decriminalizing polygamy would work, and everything else can be handled civilly, in wills and personal directives. TBH, even plygs don't want legalization. It opens them up to too many eyes and prevents Bleeding of the Beast.

[Roslyn]

39 minutes ago, Galloway Cave said:

It would take a lot of work changing Federal laws and regulations- SS, tax laws, inheritance regulations, insurance regulations, etc. Without getting too political, our lawmakers can't even handle the everyday, regular stuff right now. Decriminalizing polygamy would work, and everything else can be handled civilly, in wills and personal directives. TBH, even plygs don't want legalization. It opens them up to too many eyes and prevents Bleeding of the Beast.

Exactly! I can't imagine the nightmare a "divorce" would be with a man and four wives and one wants to leave.  A marital contract would look much more like the legal paperwork setting up a business partnership between 5 people vs a marriage. Add up all the legalities within an average marriage like children, health insurance, home ownership, home insurance, cars and insurance, social security.  I can't imagine what a nightmare things would be if there were NO will/trust and four legal wives plus children.  It would play out something like Dickens' Bleak House.

However, Utah could grow a booming legal community becoming the place to go to set up multi spouse marriages, like the places in the world where it's super easy to set up shell companies to hide your cash from the taxman.

[kicotan]

56 minutes ago, Roslyn said:

However, Utah could grow a booming legal community becoming the place to go to set up multi spouse marriages, like the places in the world where it's super easy to set up shell companies to hide your cash from the taxman.

Historically speaking, the LDS had to disavow/change their fundamental doctrine with regards to polygamy in order to keep their assets, still be recognized as a religion and, most importantly, be granted the statehood of Utah.  The church leadership claimed they had a revelation from God to no longer endorse/promote/support their polygamist doctrine.  They’ve done pretty well for themselves ever since, so I highly doubt the LDS would make such an enormous change in Utah~They aren’t desperate enough to announce a reversal of their position on polygamy, essentially changing the accepted dogma of Mormonism, at this point.

[DaphneCat]

5 hours ago, Galloway Cave said:

TBH, even plygs don't want legalization. It opens them up to too many eyes and prevents Bleeding of the Beast.

This.   They do NOT want the same standards applied to them as to us boring monogamists - they are essentially asking for special privileges.

[KateHearts]

On 3/27/2019 at 2:11 PM, Twopper said:

But I don't hear anything of financial trouble so far, and it has been about 8 months since the big move.

Where would you hear about financial trouble? The only things that this family release are fictitious tales of their lives. 

[AZChristian]

1 hour ago, KateHearts said:

Where would you hear about financial trouble? The only things that this family release are fictitious tales of their lives. 

Court records. 

[neh]

On 3/28/2019 at 8:16 AM, Desert Rat said:

Arizona does not recognize common law marriage.  Arizona would only recognize the legal marriage with Robyn.  However, Arizona doesn't care if Kody is sharing D with others. 

I am so slow...It took me awhile to realize that "D" was not a person.

[Rabbit Hutch]

On 3/26/2019 at 3:21 PM, Tuxcat said:

To be honest I wouldn't want to live with them either! The only person that wants this is Kody. He says its to "bring the family together" But by the time this pipe dream got built there would only be Truly, Solomon and Arielle. So it's not for the family. Its that Kody is tired and wants his own place where he is the center and the wives come to him.

Good point.  Never thought about it from that POV. 

[Granny58]

On 3/25/2019 at 1:29 PM, Kyanight said:

I don't see anything wrong with Meri's sq ft allotment EXCEPT for the fact that all of these kids are growing up and a lot of them will be out of the home in a few years.  So does Janelle and Christine need 1000 sq ft MORE?  And more importantly - Robyn has two young children  TWO!  Why in the world does she need 3500 sq ft?  That's ridiculous!   I think it's stupid that they all need to have their own living rooms but that's just me.    I don't understand why all of the wives can't have 2000 sq ft, say.  They would have an enormous living room and kitchen to share BESIDES their own kitchen.  

I think 1500 sf for Meri is fine too...heck, that's the sf for MY house.  What I don't understand is why every child needs their own bedroom.  

[Granny58]

On 3/26/2019 at 12:52 PM, Gothish520 said:

Aspyn irked the hell out of me. "I expect you to stay around until I decide to leave you." That's ridiculous.

I think that's a pretty common situation.  Who ever expects the parents to move away?  And frankly, I wouldn't move away from my child.  He may move away from me, but not vice versa.

[Granny58]

I feel really sorry for Isabel (hope that's the right one), the one with scoliosis.  I can't imagine her having to put in that amount of time EVERY DAY FOR 10 YEARS to hopefully stop her curvature.  That's ridiculous.  It is too burdensome for her.  

[say whaaaaa]

A lovely photo of Meri, on the LuLaNo cruise.  Wonder who she's giving that "come hither stare" to!  "Sam, look at me now babyyyy!"  LOL

[Sandy W]

 I haven't seen her Instagram, so maybe there are some photos showing her engaged with her fellow LLRers, I thought that was the purpose of the trip, to make contacts and attend seminars to improve her business as well as kick back and relax a little.  So far, all I have seen is Meri in a contemplative mood or having a grand old time in the company of other men. 

If this is a true reflection of realizations she is coming to in Aruba, all I can say is YOU GO, GIRL! but if it's as I suspect, to incur jealousy in Kody, it's a little pathetic really.  It seems to me that Kody will permit Meri to tag along in the relationship, but never give her what she seems to need.