8 Passengers: Spreading a Disease while Doing As I Please | Part #16

[nesland300]

Whether or not it meets any legal definition of abuse, the withholding of food (a basic necessity) as a punishment has to be pushing it. It's also undeniable that a lot of emotional manipulation and brainwashing goes on in their house too and is wrong whether or not it's "technically" abuse.

When she talked about cutting off the friends that were supposedly being inappropriate I definitely got the feeling that what actually happened was the friends were scared off by Ruby's outlandish parenting, and then Ruby convinced the kids it was the friends that were wrong. I wouldn't put it past her at all to twist any of the friends' disagreement on her parenting as "being inappropriate".

[Hannah]

I 100% think what they are doing to their kids is classified as abuse. Are they beating them? No. But they are emotionally and possibly verbally abusing them. You do NOT take a bathroom door away from someone, and you certainly don’t take a bedroom from your child for 7 or so months. Chad couldn’t even make a comment about why the meatballs had jam in them without being told he was ungrateful and unappreciative. The kids in that house do not have a voice and are not being heard. They are constantly changing schools, something must be going on for that to happen. They have no friends.

It IS abuse. It's psychological abuse. That can be extremely difficult to prove in court because it can be so discreet and covert, but fortunately (or unfortunately) for these kids, it is ALL documented in their vlogs. Chad would have a really, really good chance to become emancipated from his parents if he could get a lawyer. At the VERY least, Chad could gain some ground by requesting help from a psychologist (*not* a "life coach). Psychologists fall under the "obligation to report" criteria where they must report the abuse of a child (or an elderly person) if it is suspected. Chad, or someone else, needs to get an objective and outside qualified professional on his side. He's old enough to seek help for himself and have it taken seriously. He's got a very good case to bring before a judge (not a Mormon judge, though, so that's tough). He'll need to be sneaky and do it without Ruby knowing, though, or she'll punish him for seeking help. <- THAT alone should be a red flag for any professional to document in a court filing.

[DoodleBop2]

At one point she said each punishment lasts a minimum of six months but the kids never know if that punishment will ever end and more and more get piled on top. This isn't about teaching these kids anything it's entirely about control. They get off on controlling their kids. Their son apparently isn't worthy of anything. Imagine being 10 or 11 and you're still under punishment from something you did when you were 9.

I have friends who had parents like this that are now no contact with their family of origin.

[DoodleBop2]

At one point she said each punishment lasts a minimum of six months but the kids never know if that punishment will ever end and more and more get piled on top. This isn't about teaching these kids anything it's entirely about control. They get off on controlling their kids. Their son apparently isn't worthy of anything. Imagine being 10 or 11 and you're still under punishment from something you did when you were 9.

I have friends who had parents like this that are now no contact with their family of origin.

[Josette]

If you haven't watched this already, you should.

[YTIG60]

Whether or not it meets any legal definition of abuse, the withholding of food (a basic necessity) as a punishment has to be pushing it. It's also undeniable that a lot of emotional manipulation and brainwashing goes on in their house too and is wrong whether or not it's "technically" abuse.

It is not too often teachers have an insight to what homelife is like to this extend with vlogging. Can you image being the teacher that called to ask Ruby to bring her daughter's lunch since she forgot it and Ruby vlogs she (the teacher) is uncomfortable seeing her being hungry and it would ease her discomfort if I came to her school and brought her lunch. My guess is the school gave Eve a lunch for this day, but they should have looked into this too since it poor parenting.
If they are investigated by CPS, I would assume they'll talk to teachers. I still think they could be required to take parenting classes if they don't meet the burden of abuse. This example of not bring a lunch to school or not having money in an account so Eve could buy a school lunch in this situation, is poor parenting on different levels, but it also her age that Ruby never took into account.

[nesland300]

Teachers are mandated reporters. If there ends up being an investigation and nobody at the school reported the situation there could be some people in hot water.
We don't know what the school's response was exactly. But in the school where I teach the cafeteria would go ahead and give the kid a lunch anyway. And if I were the teacher in the situation my first move would be sending screenshots of the conversation to the principal with the counselor CC'd (this is why I don't talk to parents on the phone - email and texts leave evidence) followed by a precautionary mandated reporter call to cover myself.

[Parktown]

Taking away your kids electronics isn’t abuse, but I’ve always wondered why Ruby has such a negative attitude towards her kids using technology when she makes all of her money putting her children on the internet? She’s okay with technology when it’s used to serve her and benefit her but not when her kids play games and text their friends. I do find it concerning that she took them away while we’re still in the middle of a pandemic and life doesn’t look like it did before. The kids just don’t have as many outlets as they did before and using technology could be beneficial during this time. It’s so frustrating to watch her say she isn’t responsible for entertaining her kids, takes the younger kids toys away, won’t sign her kids up for activities because that means she’s a victim because she has to drive them places. Somethings gotta give. It’s great to see the kids always have a book in their hand, but that shouldn’t be the only outlet and activity their allowed to do.

I believe that she doesn’t want her kids surfing the web because they will actually see how their mom is abusing them. They can read here and other sites that know what she’s up to and how badly she is damaging those kids. Ruby is a narcissistic control freak.

I think she doesn’t allow the web because she doesn’t want them reading ex mormons talking about why they left and for Chad to view normal kids his age and question his existence!

[Josette]

Whether or not it meets any legal definition of abuse, the withholding of food (a basic necessity) as a punishment has to be pushing it. It's also undeniable that a lot of emotional manipulation and brainwashing goes on in their house too and is wrong whether or not it's "technically" abuse.

It is not too often teachers have an insight to what homelife is like to this extend with vlogging. Can you image being the teacher that called to ask Ruby to bring her daughter's lunch since she forgot it and Ruby vlogs she (the teacher) is uncomfortable seeing her being hungry and it would ease her discomfort if I came to her school and brought her lunch. My guess is the school gave Eve a lunch for this day, but they should have looked into this too since it poor parenting.
If they are investigated by CPS, I would assume they'll talk to teachers. I still think they could be required to take parenting classes if they don't meet the burden of abuse. This example of not bring a lunch to school or not having money in an account so Eve could buy a school lunch in this situation, is poor parenting on different levels, but it also her age that Ruby never took into account.

I don't know what bothered me more. Ruby thinking a 5-year old is responsible enough to ensure they will remember to bring a lunch to school with them or Ruby's response when Eve's teacher called asking that she bring a lunch to school for Eve and Ruby refusing, then saying afterwords that she hopes no one gives Eve lunch.

Ruby's responsibilities include making certain her children are adequately fed, and that especially applies when the children are very young like Eve.

[ba1006]

Taking away your kids electronics isn’t abuse, but I’ve always wondered why Ruby has such a negative attitude towards her kids using technology when she makes all of her money putting her children on the internet? She’s okay with technology when it’s used to serve her and benefit her but not when her kids play games and text their friends. I do find it concerning that she took them away while we’re still in the middle of a pandemic and life doesn’t look like it did before. The kids just don’t have as many outlets as they did before and using technology could be beneficial during this time. It’s so frustrating to watch her say she isn’t responsible for entertaining her kids, takes the younger kids toys away, won’t sign her kids up for activities because that means she’s a victim because she has to drive them places. Somethings gotta give. It’s great to see the kids always have a book in their hand, but that shouldn’t be the only outlet and activity their allowed to do.

This reminded me of a vlog Bonnie did about a week or so ago. She actually said she does not allow her children to watch YouTube videos (except for their family's vlogs). I almost spit out my coffee. Did she not remember that YouTube pays her bills? Such a dumb woman.

[PumpkinHead]

Taking away your kids electronics isn’t abuse, but I’ve always wondered why Ruby has such a negative attitude towards her kids using technology when she makes all of her money putting her children on the internet? She’s okay with technology when it’s used to serve her and benefit her but not when her kids play games and text their friends. I do find it concerning that she took them away while we’re still in the middle of a pandemic and life doesn’t look like it did before. The kids just don’t have as many outlets as they did before and using technology could be beneficial during this time. It’s so frustrating to watch her say she isn’t responsible for entertaining her kids, takes the younger kids toys away, won’t sign her kids up for activities because that means she’s a victim because she has to drive them places. Somethings gotta give. It’s great to see the kids always have a book in their hand, but that shouldn’t be the only outlet and activity their allowed to do.

I believe that she doesn’t want her kids surfing the web because they will actually see how their mom is abusing them. They can read here and other sites that know what she’s up to and how badly she is damaging those kids. Ruby is a narcissistic control freak.

Plus she probably doesn't want them to find any exmormon pages or anything bad about the mormon church. Can't have them questioning their faith, of course.

[Alycat_2001_uk]

Teachers are mandated reporters. If there ends up being an investigation and nobody at the school reported the situation there could be some people in hot water.
We don't know what the school's response was exactly. But in the school where I teach the cafeteria would go ahead and give the kid a lunch anyway. And if I were the teacher in the situation my first move would be sending screenshots of the conversation to the principal with the counselor CC'd (this is why I don't talk to parents on the phone - email and texts leave evidence) followed by a precautionary mandated reporter call to cover myself.

I think some people don't understand what level of behaviour would lead to a safeguarding report from a school or social services to get heavily involved in a family. Awful as Ruby's behaviour is, it really doesn't meet that level. Schools wouldn't make a safeguarding referral for one missed lunch. CPS isn't going to remove kids because their phones were confiscated. I don't say that to excuse Ruby, as I think the way she treats them can absolutely be abusive. As far as we know though, they have access to food and shelter, and she isn't regularly beating them. That would be the standard they'd be looking for.

[nesland300]

Schools wouldn't make a safeguarding referral for one missed lunch.

One missed lunch isn't going to bring about a mandated reporting call. But a missed lunch, plus refusal to bring a lunch, plus comments that she shouldn't be fed because a 5 year old is responsible for her own lunch definitely gets the wheels rolling. Plus for teachers it's generally advisable to go ahead and make the call in iffy situations even when CPS isn't likely to do anything because heads can roll if you don't report something and it ends up being more serious than you thought.

[DoodleBop2]

It just doesn't make any sense. They claim to "protect" their children from the internet and outside influences yet her children's rights to privacy have been forever changed thanks to their parents filming them for youtube. This will follow them. This will come up in school applications and job interviews and when they meet a person they'd like to date. They may find out stills from the videos have made it to creeper websites. They will meet people who know more about the inner workings of their family life than any stranger should.

[DoodleBop2]

sorry 524 errors.

[DoodleBop2]

It just doesn't make any sense. They claim to "protect" their children from the internet and outside influences yet her children's rights to privacy have been forever changed thanks to their parents filming them for youtube. This will follow them. This will come up in school applications and job interviews and when they meet a person they'd like to date. They may find out stills from the videos have made it to creeper websites. They will meet people who know more about the inner workings of their family life than any stranger should.

If they really wanted to protect their kids from the evils of the world they sure went about it in an ass backwards way.

[callie73]

Didn't Ruby vlog about how the School had a meeting with her about Eve and her lunch. Ruby had to go talk to them because if I remember correctly the school was accusing her of neglect.

[Happy+Charlie]

Whether or not it meets any legal definition of abuse, the withholding of food (a basic necessity) as a punishment has to be pushing it. It's also undeniable that a lot of emotional manipulation and brainwashing goes on in their house too and is wrong whether or not it's "technically" abuse.

It is not too often teachers have an insight to what homelife is like to this extend with vlogging. Can you image being the teacher that called to ask Ruby to bring her daughter's lunch since she forgot it and Ruby vlogs she (the teacher) is uncomfortable seeing her being hungry and it would ease her discomfort if I came to her school and brought her lunch. My guess is the school gave Eve a lunch for this day, but they should have looked into this too since it poor parenting.
If they are investigated by CPS, I would assume they'll talk to teachers. I still think they could be required to take parenting classes if they don't meet the burden of abuse. This example of not bring a lunch to school or not having money in an account so Eve could buy a school lunch in this situation, is poor parenting on different levels, but it also her age that Ruby never took into account.

I was very familiar with lunch at 3 different elementary schools and not one of those schools would allow a child to go without something at lunch. At two of them, they did move to only offer a peanut butter and jelly or ham sandwich, milk and a fruit, instead of a full hot meal, but, still, it was a lunch. They could not get dessert or sides. If Eve's school did not provide something for her due to Ruby's negligence, then I feel certain they would not feel responsible for reporting any ill parenting by the Frankes. Don't forget, she vlogged about doing this to Russell about a year before, and I'm sure the others would have forgotten their lunch a time or two. If anything, someone needs to give proper parenting lessons, because those kids are gonna grow up thinking this is the norm and the cycle will just repeat itself. Pretty sad.

[Josette]

[WheresMyCoffee]

Taking someone's bed is dehumanizing.

The issue is one child can lose their phone forever for something another won't.

Even prisoners have their own stuff not "the room my mom allows me to use"

Religious punishment camping in the woods?

She's always been wackadoodle but some shit is clearly abusive but she's a rich white lady so legally I doubt anything will happen.

Having an i-pad is a privledge, having your lunch at school and a bed to sleep in are basic needs you need to meet for your child. If they were a poor family and the child went without lunch on more than one occasion or it was noted that a child was sleeping on a bean bag for over 7 months you KNOW that cps would be involved, why is it Ok just because they are a rich white mormon family?