I have spent a bit of time reading the husband's social media posts. Some of the things he has posted are questionable at best and terribly exploitive.
On IG he posts a video of B and the dogs sundowning. The vid shows the dogs napping on the couch and her sitting in a chair staring at him somewhat confusedly.
Another shows him cleaning up the kitchen with B watching a documentary on the holocaust. He points out she begins to cry so can still feel pain.
He has removed much if not most negative commentary on FB.
Personally I think this is extraordinarily exploitive and strips her of dignity. I would not want this for myself
Because I have been so horrified by this I have now gone through his entire Twitter TL, which handily links to his FB and IG accounts.
This guy is a PARASITE. He likes the fame, notoriety, accolades, board appointments received from being her caregiver. What he likes the best is the sympathy.
And almost everyday for the last three years he has b&tched about how awful it is on one of his three social media platforms-- sometimes simultaneously.
He cannot take any criticism what soever.
The 32 year old daughter is his from a previous marriage.
I think he won't put her in MC because that ends his relevance. And it breaks the pity equation. He makes bank off of woe is me.
Sheesh, he sounds like someone his wife actually needs protection FROM. It's sad when people exploit the elderly and disabled, and even worse when it's their own spouse or family.
The newspaper article was quiet interesting. What I got from the article is that the girlfriend is also helping D. Smith with her daily needs. Hey, what better way to save money then to have the husband's girlfriend do the chores of a caregiver.
It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out once later down the road when B needs much more care. Will the girlfriend still be wanting to do all of the caregiving type of work?
The original washington post article was worth a read. The follow up editorial was too. (By Patti Davis) The commentariat in the first article lambasted him every which way but good.
I wish I could post a comment he made on Twitter but as a mod explains. It sets off their spam filters. But wowsa.
With girlfriend he is searching for more relevance and fame, imo. He maintains he is bringing to the forefront the difficulties of being a caregiver. Not buying it. At this point he is using B Smith.
So you can see these vids, his handle on both Twitter and IG are @ThankyouDan. And that right there is interesting choice. He has a second Twitter account Dan Gasby/B Smith. As I said, all of his relevance flows from her.
I am not doxxing the guy. These are public. As is his FB.
And has removed all critical commentary from FB and blocked Twitterati who are critical.
I waited until I had seen some of her videos, old and new. Also watched his video etc. Your question is What do I think? My full answer is too long to post here, I may blog on it at some point. A longish short version is, from what little is shown on video, knowing it's been edited to show the best of everything, etc. I don't feel one way or another about it. They should and seem to be doing what works best for them all. She seems well taken care of.
She is being monitored by doctors who know the situation. She seems to be fine and well cared for. She's, obviously unaware at this point, of him or his relationships so to her that is a non-issue. His choices regarding his personal life are none of my business. As long as she's well taken care of his choices are irrelevant to me. I'm sure by now the "outraged masses" have pressured social services into checking on her well-being. If anything had been found amiss it would be in the news. If a government agency could find even a tiny legal reason to take control of her fabled "fortunes" I'm sure they would have. Of course that's assuming those fortunes even exist. From what I can see they made a lot of money but also lived lavish lifestyles. From what I know of medical care it's frickin expensive, insurance only covers a minute fraction and the rich don't qualify for medicaid. A fortune can be depleted in no time at all lost down the medical treatment black hole. We burned through an unbelievable amount of money, wiped out both of our life savings and spent nearly every penny of my income on pops diagnosis and treatment before we finally forced workers compensation to pay for his work related injury. If she was the only source of income before her decline they will be broke soon enough if not already.
I've always been in favor of families doing what's best for the family, as a whole and I've never really cared what the rest of societal opinion is on their choices. I'm not naive enough to believe that those choices, if not within the paramenters of the "sainted caregiver" our society demands will be accepted. We live in a time where differing opinions are considered hate, so, yeah, one can expect the haters to hate. It's all they have, it's all they know. I remember in my younger days when those who placed their elderly or declining, loved ones in carehomes rather than "sacrificing their life" to care for them in home, were often treated horribly, viewed as selfish, spoken ill of, criticized, shamed and shunned. As time has gone by those willing to bear the brunt of societal disfavor by doing what was best for them, won those now doing so, the right to place a loved one without being judged a heartless monster. It's now, almost, socially acceptable for people to place their loved ones in care-homes and the pendulum is even swinging so far that some of those who choose not to place a loved one in a home are looked askance at. That only happened because people stood up, spoke out, and gradually normalized the idea that family members cannot always and should not always have to give up everything in order to take care of a declining family member in their home. I see this the same way. They're going outside the box and they are being hit with the societal pressures to conform with what our society see as the only options for care-givers. In the USA martrys are beloved heros, and those selfish enough to demonstrate another option/opinion are the evil villains. It is what it is. That's the "short version" of my opinion, that and $10 will get you a cuppa cuppa
On IG he posts a video of B and the dogs sundowning. The vid shows the dogs napping on the couch and her sitting in a chair staring at him somewhat confusedly.
Another shows him cleaning up the kitchen with B watching a documentary on the holocaust. He points out she begins to cry so can still feel pain.
He has removed much if not most negative commentary on FB.
Personally I think this is extraordinarily exploitive and strips her of dignity. I would not want this for myself
This guy is a PARASITE. He likes the fame, notoriety, accolades, board appointments received from being her caregiver. What he likes the best is the sympathy.
And almost everyday for the last three years he has b&tched about how awful it is on one of his three social media platforms-- sometimes simultaneously.
He cannot take any criticism what soever.
The 32 year old daughter is his from a previous marriage.
I think he won't put her in MC because that ends his relevance. And it breaks the pity equation. He makes bank off of woe is me.
It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out once later down the road when B needs much more care. Will the girlfriend still be wanting to do all of the caregiving type of work?
With girlfriend he is searching for more relevance and fame, imo. He maintains he is bringing to the forefront the difficulties of being a caregiver. Not buying it. At this point he is using B Smith.
"when people tell you this Sh*t about "til death do you part," it's an insane notion!
Take care of someone, absolutely!
But to live a tortured life without having a life yourself is re*uckulous.
Then he links to a FB post. Where he posts the very same thing.
Time to put her in MC. as I said He makes bank off of woe is me.
I am not doxxing the guy. These are public. As is his FB.
And has removed all critical commentary from FB and blocked Twitterati who are critical.
My full answer is too long to post here, I may blog on it at some point. A longish short version is, from what little is shown on video, knowing it's been edited to show the best of everything, etc. I don't feel one way or another about it. They should and seem to be doing what works best for them all. She seems well taken care of.
She is being monitored by doctors who know the situation. She seems to be fine and well cared for. She's, obviously unaware at this point, of him or his relationships so to her that is a non-issue. His choices regarding his personal life are none of my business. As long as she's well taken care of his choices are irrelevant to me. I'm sure by now the "outraged masses" have pressured social services into checking on her well-being. If anything had been found amiss it would be in the news. If a government agency could find even a tiny legal reason to take control of her fabled "fortunes" I'm sure they would have. Of course that's assuming those fortunes even exist. From what I can see they made a lot of money but also lived lavish lifestyles. From what I know of medical care it's frickin expensive, insurance only covers a minute fraction and the rich don't qualify for medicaid. A fortune can be depleted in no time at all lost down the medical treatment black hole. We burned through an unbelievable amount of money, wiped out both of our life savings and spent nearly every penny of my income on pops diagnosis and treatment before we finally forced workers compensation to pay for his work related injury. If she was the only source of income before her decline they will be broke soon enough if not already.
I've always been in favor of families doing what's best for the family, as a whole and I've never really cared what the rest of societal opinion is on their choices. I'm not naive enough to believe that those choices, if not within the paramenters of the "sainted caregiver" our society demands will be accepted. We live in a time where differing opinions are considered hate, so, yeah, one can expect the haters to hate. It's all they have, it's all they know. I remember in my younger days when those who placed their elderly or declining, loved ones in carehomes rather than "sacrificing their life" to care for them in home, were often treated horribly, viewed as selfish, spoken ill of, criticized, shamed and shunned. As time has gone by those willing to bear the brunt of societal disfavor by doing what was best for them, won those now doing so, the right to place a loved one without being judged a heartless monster. It's now, almost, socially acceptable for people to place their loved ones in care-homes and the pendulum is even swinging so far that some of those who choose not to place a loved one in a home are looked askance at. That only happened because people stood up, spoke out, and gradually normalized the idea that family members cannot always and should not always have to give up everything in order to take care of a declining family member in their home. I see this the same way. They're going outside the box and they are being hit with the societal pressures to conform with what our society see as the only options for care-givers. In the USA martrys are beloved heros, and those selfish enough to demonstrate another option/opinion are the evil villains. It is what it is.
That's the "short version" of my opinion, that and $10 will get you a cuppa cuppa