Hi Juli (et al.),
I can't prove it, but I suspect that your suggestion is the case. I construct the family the following way:
Mary Colclough, daughter of Benjamin and Rachel was born likely around 1705 or so. She then married John Kidwell about 1721. She and John Kidwell had children William and Sarah. Then John Kidwell dies 16 JUN 1725, as recorded in the St. Paul's Parish Register. Mary then married John Debell between 1726 and 1734. Her daughter Jane Debell was born 03 MAY 1735. Then something happens to DEBELL, and Mary marries Samuel Thornbury 20 APR 1744. They have children John Kidwell Thornbury (b. 19 FEB 1744/45) and Elizabeth Kidwell (b. 15 APR 1746).
I have tried to include the extant material to construct the family. I still have some difficulties with it. However, I think it doesn't suffer the same failings as previous attempts. One thing you will see with this family (online representations, e.g.) is that people will link KIDWELL directly to Sarah, the daughter of Rachel. This is a result of a bad will abstract, and is kept alive by Boddie's work. This connection is in CLEAR ERROR. I can find find no evidence of any kind for Sarah ever marrying anyone. I have tried to sort out the problem of the Kidwells, but the problem is that available hypotheses about the family are so fouled as to be intractable. For example, usually those having Sarah Colclough married to a KIDWELL will also have Sarah having children in 1775 (Joshia Kidwell). The problem with this is that Sarah would have been 55+ years old at that time. This is flatly impossible. Of course it could be that Joshia Kidwell's estimated year of birth is wrong. But when I try to dig into that, I only find that the available Kidwell genealogy gets worse from there. So I have essentially given up. I ascribe all links from Sarah Colclough (daughter of Rachel) to Kidwell as error, and leave it at that. Unfortunately, I can't find any descendants of the five kids of Mary Colclough that I list, and that includes Sarah Kidwell. I think there is still hope for Kidwell-Colclough. For example, if there is a John Kidwell born about 1720, and he marries Sarah Colclough, and those Kidwell children like Joshia should be marked "b. BEF. 1775", then it may still be okay. But everyone I have ever asked has led either directly or indirectly to the same evidence as quoted by Boddie, which is clearly erroneous.
Other troubles in this family include really poor date estimations as seen in the Ancestral File (see AFN: CVLR-BW, e.g.). This file shows Rachel's marriage at age 37 (a bit late, I would argue), and that she had a child a few years before her marriage (a bit unlikely, I would argue).