The Duggars, SERIOUSLY, you're kidding right?

My Womb is Not an Uncontrolled Breeding Farm

I have been sitting on this unpublished Hub for over a year now. Every time I have tried to write it, I end up flabbergasted. I love the word flabbergasted because it does not get used much and it congers up images of a crazed woman trying to go two directions at once. When I think of the Duggars, I am flabbergasted!

20 and counting, minus 1. Yes Michelle Duggard suffered a miscarriage. I am conflicted. On one hand sorry to hear this, a loss of a child is heartbreaking. I know. I suffered 4 miscarriages between my oldest and youngest children (however, I only have 2 children). On the other hand, I feel a certain sense of relief since there will not be another neglected, attention starved child added to the bulging Duggar families' herd.

I can only watch this show during periods of insomnia, which by the way, does not help me to sleep because so much of what takes place on 19 and Counting troubles me. It angers me. It saddens me. It just plain disgusts me! These poor children are being brought up with little attention paid to their emotional well being. The younger ones struggle for mom and dad's attention. The older ones are put into service as free child care givers losing any part of teenager-hood which should be a carefree time of gradual freedom to transition into the burdens of adulthood.

Watching the Duggars brings to mind the old saying "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should". God gave women millions of eggs and men millions of sperm, NOT because you should strive to fertilize all of them but because He wanted to insure the human race had plenty of chances to procreate in an imperfect World. Let's face it, if you have ever watch PBS and the film on conception, you know how the odds are stacked against any egg ever getting fertilized!

I find it disgusting the Duggars forbid their children to watch "evil television" and then make millions by being on television. What message are they sending to their children? I think a very mixed one. The Duggars are a contradiction and I have a hard time understanding how being on TV is better than watching TV . I can only imagine the confusion of their children.

The Duggars have their defenders. Just check youtube.com and you will find an infinite amount of videos supporting the Duggars. One in particular went as far to say anyone who disagrees or finds issue with having so many children is an atheist and compares having children to inanimate objects such as "having too many cars" and states emphatically, there is never "too many". Of course the speaker of that particular video is a man. I would love to hear his opinions once he grows a uterus and has it stretched over his swelled head a few times or suffers the joys of everlasting incontinence from a bladder grown large from pregnancy. I bet his tune would change. More children? "no thanks, twos my limit!"

For the record: I do believe in Jesus Christ. I believe God created us in His image (and gave us intelligence with common sense). A parent's duty is to instill love, discipline, values and nurture a child's ability to grow and develop reasoning skills. There is no way a parent can be a star of a reality show and provide adequate attention and child rearing to 19 children! I do not care what spin fanatics try to put on the Duggars parenting skills--there's just NO way!

When I was growing up in the 1970s the average kid family was 4. I was number 3 out of 3. My friends who were in families of 4 seemed chaotic when you added 2 parents as everything was (and still is) geared toward the family of 4.

I did have a friend who was from a family of 13. He was number 8. I remember my friend was always impressed with my family when he was invited to dinner. His family never sat at the table all together. Dinner was buffet-style. My friend did not participate in any extra circular activities like baseball because his mom had her hands full caring for the smaller children and his dad worked 12 hours a day. No one could pick him up from any activities nor did he have anyway to get there. Safety was another issue too.

One time my friend's baby brother was burned by a pot on the stove. My friend said he found his brother screaming and with horrible burns on his face. The child had apparently grabbed a pot cooking on the stove and the hot contents spilled on him. My friend ran to find his mother, whom he found in the middle of breast feeding another baby. When he tried to tell his mom that his brother was hurt, she shooed him away saying "not now". By the time he was able to get his mother's attention, his baby brother's burns were blistering. The child suffered from 3rd degree burns and was scarred. Imagine adding 6 more children to the mix!

My problem with the Duggars is their believability (yeah, I know that's probably not a word). I don't believe them. They profess God has instructed them to have many and multiple. It sounds to me like a distortion of the Word. If the Duggars truly believe they are missionaries for God as parents, why not adopt a few of the thousands of parent-less children God already created?

The Duggars look to me to be a family ripe for the show "Intervention" as they sorely need an intervention into this obsession of mindlessly and carelessly bring children into this World. The Duggars do not seem to care about the future or realize their own mortality. The babies they produce now, they may never live long enough to see them grow into adults. If the Duggars do manage to live long enough to see their children have children, I cannot blame the Duggars if burn-out hits them and they have little desire to be involved grandparents, or maybe they will if there's a reality show contract in the works.

I do not like the message 19 and Counting is sending to the World. Actually, I am not sure exactly what their point is in airing this show other than the Duggars appear to be more like circus freaks than anythings else. I do not like the factory production of children nor the marketing of the Duggar children as if they were "product" to sell their crappy reality show.

My womb is not a breeding farm. Thank you very much!




More by this Author


Comments 60 comments

Cara.R profile image

Cara.R 4 years ago from New York

I respect your point of view.

I know of a family that runs a very popular restaurant in my area. The owner has to be old enough to be my great grandmother and she was one of 22 children. Way back then!

All before reality TV, maybe some of them before TV was around. I'm not sure how many of them are alive now. However her Mother's large family was not looked down upon but TV wasn't around to mass judge them. And all these children were taken good care of.


Askme profile image

Askme 4 years ago Author

I hope you don't think I was "looking down" on the Duggars because they have so many children. I am casting doubt about their motives for having so many. Meaning I suspect it is less religious motives and more celebrity status.

I agree back in the day, especially pre-Industrialization, large families were abundant and necessary just to run the family farm. Parents cared less about their child's emotional development but then again, we were less educated in the ways of raising healthy, well adjusted children. We know better now.


Kat915 profile image

Kat915 4 years ago from Ohio

I do believe you are right about the Duggars being a walking, talking, baby-making contradiction to what they spout as their morals/beliefs (in the few shows I have watched of theirs). I feel those kids are being cheated out of normal, young lives...and that's not right for their parents to put them through the strain of being adults too soon. Maybe their minus 1 child is a sign from her body (or elsewhere) that she needs to stop. If I happen to flip through the tube and see their show I will keep going...that's one less person watching...so maybe if more do it the show will eventually be cancelled.


Express10 profile image

Express10 4 years ago from East Coast

Her words and actions are contradictory. I am also flabbergasted at people such as this because the higher numbers of children you have especially after certain ages, the more the risk increases for mother and child.


Askme profile image

Askme 4 years ago Author

Thank you for stopping by and posting Kat915...Smart idea to surf on by if you come across the Duggars show again. Why fill your mind with trash anyway, plus I think this show (and others dealing with reality shows involving children) are a form of abuse. They DO rob children of a normal upbringing. Nice put Kat!


Askme profile image

Askme 4 years ago Author

Yes Express 10 you are so right. Natures way of telling you it is time to stop producing children. I've read recently that age also impacts a man contrary to the belief that men can reproduce for as long as they want. Apparently sperm ages too. Thank you for stopping by and posting.


pmccray profile image

pmccray 4 years ago from Utah

I've watched very very little of the show not even a whole episode. The concept sickens me, that this woman would weaken her body to pump out that many children, who may be lacking in some personal mommy time. You know the old saying that out of three the middle child is the most neglected, I think there is probably a bunch of middle children in this brood.


Askme profile image

Askme 4 years ago Author

Thank You pmccray for stopping by and commenting. Yes this show sickens me too. Afraid I made the mistake of watching a couple of their older episodes last night, it was "18 and counting" so guess it was pre-number 19 baby. It really saddened me. First there was basically a newborn asleep on the dirty floor face down and no one checking on her. Second a 3-4 year old girl was sick with the flu, throwing up and NO mommy in sight. No one checked the poor child's temperature to see if she might go into convulsions from it being too high and there was another young boy of about 7 or 8 using a crutch to suck on the rubber bottom and pushing it into his mouth!! No one is watching these children for their safety.

Another episode had the family going to Washington, DC and visiting an Ethiopian Restaurant, which I finally said "great they are finally exposing these children to others outside their immediate family" but instead of it being a positive learning experience, the kids made fun of the dancers and complained that the incense used by the dancers as part of their ceremonial dance made them "sick", pretty sure it was a mob mentality because one complained of a headache and they all started complaining-probably because they got a second of attention from their parents. This children are growing up socially backwards, narrow minded and fearful of everything and anyone who is not like them--which is probably most of the World! It is so sad. What I saw last night would prompt me to call Child Services.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

To Askme: Excellent hub. What you have said is so true about large families. I do not believe that anyone should have more than 3 children. I believe that 3 children is a large enough family for any parent to effectively raise and handle.

I, too, have horror stories of people raised in large families, including my maternal cousins and aunts and uncles. Children from large families are often attention starved. My mother, who is the oldest of ten children, was so attention starved that she was needy and clinged to people who often disrespected her because she needed some type of attention.

My aunt, third of ten, was so attention starved that she went out with the FIRST boy who showed her some type of attention. Result: she got pregnant with an unwanted child as a teenager and had to quit school. Another aunt, ninth of ten, did the same thing.

Children from large families are not happy; however, most are in denial regarding the situation. Many children from large families purport that they are so "happy" when in actuality, they are not. They are miserable- of course, many of them are impoverished, doing without the most simplest things, no parental affection, no exposure to cultural and intellectual activities, being left to their own devices(think of Mark Wahlberg, youngest of nine, who indulged in delinquent activities because of parental neglect), being feral because of little parental training, and other deleterious things associated with large families such as delinquency, gangs, and teenage pregnancy.

Many people do not want to hear the facts about the pathology and dysfunction of large families. However, it is there. No intelligent and educated person elect to have any more than 3 children. Most intelligent and highly educated parents have small families because it is beneficial to the parents and children alike.

The Duggars are not the only dysfunctional and adherrent large family. The average large family is thus. Children in large families suffer and lead quite a hellish existence which adversely affects them in adulthood. Children in large families develop a poverty consciousness, a pack mentality, have little or no sense of individuation/self, and tend to be low achievers throughout life. Furthermore, children in large families tend to be the LEAST affluent in their adulthooods. They are also the LEAST educated-they seldom attend college. They are lucky if they complete secondary education as the issue of education and academic achievement are not paramount issues in the large family.

Parents of large families are only interested in the rudiments such as food, clothing, shelter, and nothing else. They are concerned with the mechanics of pure survival, not actually living. There is a marked difference between the culture of the small family and the culture of the large family. Yes, the culture is very different. Askme, you are an intellectual person whom I greatly respect.


Askme profile image

Askme 4 years ago Author

Thank you GM. Yes you summed it up perfectly: parents of large families are only interested in survival not actual living. I guess that is what makes me so angry about the Duggars and others who selfishly (maybe it is not intentional) bring more into the world than what they can reasonably care for. Thanks again GM! I look forward to reading your hubs!


Amanda Roddy profile image

Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

"First there was basically a newborn asleep on the dirty floor face down and no one checking on her. Second a 3-4 year old girl was sick with the flu, throwing up and NO mommy in sight. No one checked the poor child's temperature to see if she might go into convulsions from it being too high and there was another young boy of about 7 or 8 using a crutch to suck on the rubber bottom and pushing it into his mouth!! No one is watching these children for their safety."

. That was Jana in the bathroom with Jennifer when she was sick. I have not been able to see any new episodes but ghees and they complain Octomom and the Gosselins. If you take away the religious aspect from the Duggars CPS would likely be beating on the doors. I am not putting down religious people; just that it seems people excuse their behavior more.


Askme profile image

Askme 4 years ago Author

I agree Amanda. I live in southern california and hear daily reports about Octomom. She should NEVER been allowed to have all those babies. At least the Duggars are married and there is two of them. These poor kids of Octomom are subjected to her bi-polar antics. She's done porn, she's allowed them to destroy the rented home she was living in--i mean they took spray paint to the interior walls. She is NOT a mom, but a full blown attention whore who had the children for one reason only--to give her the center of attention. I mean she gets state aid to the tune of thousands of dollars each month yet cannot buy food for the kids but has $500 for hair extensions!!

The doctor who agreed to do the in vitro should go to jail like Michael Jackson's doctor did!!


Amanda Roddy profile image

Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

I don't excuse Octomom or the Duggars. The older Duggar girls are saddled with a bulk of the childrearung. I have read others who grew up like this and they feel their childhood stolen from them. There is no way a couple could spend quality time with each child daily. I am marry too but it doesn't mean to have 19 kids.


kat148 3 years ago

oh I so agree. The duggers disgust me too. They are big time hypocrites and I have never seen their show. Saw them once on Oprah. They are soooo religious and will not go on the pill because she once got preggo while on the pill and had a miscarriage. Well duhh - if you get pregnant you have to stop taking the pill! And then they say God blessed them with all these kids. NO - Medical science did. The big religious freaks keep having in vitro. If they are sooo religious why on eartj are they doing in-vitro???


Askme profile image

Askme 3 years ago Author

Hi Kat148, Thank you for stopping by and commenting. My husband told me the other day the Duggers were in Puerto Rico and decided to try snorkeling however, their strict views and interpretation of scripture prevented any of them from wearing bathing suits. So....yep you guessed it, they swam in full chaste attire. Girls with their long skirts, sweaters, blouses, not sure if they were allowed to take off their shoes. Are you freaking kidding me!!!


Zehr 3 years ago

Children in smaller families don't get quality time with their parent(s) so stop with the crap. The children in smaller families sit around watching tv, eating junk food, playing video games, and running the streets. The parents are at work, sleep, on the couch drunk, nonexistant, don't want to be bothered, etc. So what, they schedule time to spend with their children, at least they care to spend quality time with their children. They travel the world and learn about different cultures. Some people with 2 children don't even leave the town their in because their too lazy. Surely if they can do it with 19 children and other family members then smaller families can do it too. These people AREN'T dependent on welfare to making a living nor are their children on drugs, twerking on youtube, nor hanging out in the streets with thugs. The oldest son is MARRIED and has children so he decided not to be the stereotypical BABYDADDY. He was and still is raised with an active father in his life unlike children nowadays. These people have morals, dignity, and respect for themselves and each other. Michelle and Jim Bob are not aborting their children because they are wanted not just one night stand children. They are a committed couple that are raising well behaved, upstanding, civil children that will contribute to society by working and helping the community. Parents nowadays could careless about raising their children and don't even help them with school work nor get to know their teachers. These people are a FAMILY that love each other. Many families are broken, don't contact each other, hate each other, and just not a tight knit family unit. Michelle and Jim Bob take marriage seriously and it shows and they genuinely love each other and they still look young and vibrant. Regardless of the number of children Michelle has birthed she is still a very attractive woman compared to women that have birthed less than 19 children. She takes care of herself and her husband. I don't know any marriages that have lasted as long as theirs. If she wants to adopt then she will but there is no need to suggest she adopt just because there are children in the world in need of a family. You adopt those children in need of homes! Choosing to have her OWN children is a right. Just like women having many children that can't afford them are having children. Michelle Duggars children are all by one man, not 2, 3, 4, 5, and so on. People don't take relationships serious, having sex with random people, getting pregnant by random people and jumping from relationship to relationship is of poor taste. Michelle and Jim Bob are taking care of THEIR children and living well while people are complaining about them exploiting their children. They have a clean, tasteful, family show that everyone can watch and see watch a real family looks like. Go make a fuss about people having children and tossing them in garbage cans, letting them go to foster care, dropping them off at the fire department, kicking them out the house, killing them, etc. Go make a fuss about people on welfare for decades and taking full advantage of taxpayers money. Go make a fuss about people cheating the SYSTEM! Michelle and Jim Bob AREN'T selfish they care about life, people, community, children, and themselves. Making a fuss about this family is a waste of time because they are a good exemplary family and they are doing damn fine with their 19 kids and counting.


Askme profile image

Askme 3 years ago Author

Zehr, Well thank you? Nice rambling rant. Don't see your point and it is virtually impossible for Michelle and Jim Bob to give any time individually to their children. It has been taped many times showing them NOT being available to their kids.

They are hypocrites. Not allowing TV because "TV is the embodiment of the Devil" then to make a living exploiting your children on TV is hypocritical.

Making your kids dress like they are living in 1930's prairie times, or making them deny emotions to be "just happy idiots" all the time is unhealthy and sick.

Disagree....19 kids and counting is a sick, twisted, unreal and exploitative, disgrace. Where are Child Services??


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Of course it is. The Duggars do not really care about their children. As with the overwhelming majority of parents in large families, they are in love with the idea of having a large family. So much that they are not really concerned about the ramifications of their actions on the rest of the children. Most children in large families DON'T like being in large families, particularly the oldest child. Did a hub on this. Again, it is the OLDEST children in large families who are THE REAL parents. Parents in large families DON'T raise their children, they are parents in name only. Askme, the Duggars are just plain selfish and abusive parents.


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

Agree GM, totally agree. My mother is the only example I need to look to. She was the oldest of 9. Her mother was an illiterate, hillbilly and I say that not out of disrespect but out of truth. She was mean and nasty. She slapped my sister across the mouth when my sister was only 4 years old when the two of them got in an elevator. My grandmother did not know how to work an elevator. When my sister reached up and hit the button, she was not met with "oh you are such a smart girl" but rather it was taken as an affront.

My mother was brutally worked to death by her mother. She was a built in nanny. One of my mom's brothers had brain damage from a fall off the bed. Too many kids in charge of kids. My mom had to take care of him and change his diapers which he wore all his life.

My mom suffered beatings that knocked her out, a shortage of food and improper dental and health care. All of this affected her parenting skills.

My mom tried to write of her experiences. It was an incoherent rambling bunch of words about her life but the main thing I got out of it was she was raised by a mother who had too many children and felt trapped by them. My mom's father frequently disappeared for years at a time and came home sporadically to impregnate my grandma.

I realize the Duggars aren't like my grandparents...but still, too many children, not enough time, little attention=NOT GOOD!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

It sure isn't good at all. I found it totally surprising to hear people state"how happy" they were being part of a large family, even rationalizing it. However, upon close observation and among friends, they bemoan how miserable it is, especially the oldest ones. There is one forum thread on the Duggars supposedly trying for a 20th child by Stacie L. I replied in the posts that large families(6 or more children per household) is wrong and children do not receive the prerequisite love, attention, and care. I also stated that children from large families tend to support and raise themselves.

Well, I was ATTACKED. One person, supposedly educated, indicated that I was RUDE to state this. She indicated that Michelley could have as many children as SHE wanted as the children are "well-behaved" and "taken care off". Another poster indicated how "ignorant" I was. Oh, really now? This poster saw nothing wrong with children raising and supporting themselves.

Another person, a "troll" informed me that the oldest Duggar daughters LOVE to raise their younger siblings. This subidiot even stated that siblings LOVE to raise siblings as it forms a "bonding" experience. What a subidiot. Oldest children are FORCED to be parents to siblings because the "actual parents" are too stupid, lazy, and/or uneducated to practice birth control. Yes, there are so myopic distractor who are for large families although there are detrimental to the children particularly. You have your stories and I have mine. I have seen first hand what large families have done to my mother and aunt.

I have heard children from large families who have NO respect for their parents, particularly their mothers. One called her mother stupid and disregarded her(she was the middle of 20 children). Daughters in large families, especially oldest daughters, tend to hate their mothers. My mother and aunt hated theirs. My father even relayed to me that when my maternal grandmother was AGAIN pregnant with # 10, my mother went into a tizzy. Makes me GLAD that I am an only child. I believe that 1-3 children, maybe 4, is enough for a parent to effectively raise by themselves w/o enlisting the help of the older children, that is ABUSIVE! Well, nice talking to you again, Askme, have a lovely and blessed weekend. BTW, parents who have large to very large families, w/little exception, tend to be uneducated or undereducated. If they were educated, they would realize the detriments of large families to themselves and their children.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Askme, you should write about your mother's experience regarding being part of a large families. That should be an eye-opening and deter people from having children they cannot possibly support emotionally and psychologically by themselves without enlisting the aid of the oldest child.

I feel so sorry for oldest children in large to very large families. I have written hubs on the subject. They catch hell. Being the oldest child in a large to very large family is analogous to being a slave or a forced laborer. A slave or forced laborer have more leeway than the oldest child in a large to very large family.

I feel that there is a SPECIAL PLACE for parents of large to very large families. My mother was SMART enough to escape from the hell, educating herself and having AS LITTLE to do with family as possible. She saw them sporadically, it was my oldest aunt, who caught ALL THE HELL, leaving home at SIXTEEN!


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

Amen to all of what you state GM! I guess because of my mother's experiences I am fascinated with this large family thing. I should write about it. My relationship with my Mother was very conflicted and even with realizing much of what she was and her lack of parenting skills were because of her mother's neglect and lack of skills, I still have not totally forgiven her. She passed away a few years ago, so I probably need to get over it.

I totally agree about the oldest in these big families catching hell and being held responsible for anything that goes wrong. My mother's brothers suffered greatly- all struggled with alcohol problems and each one left home at 16 to join the military.

I really doubt the Duggar's oldest daughters "enjoy" raising the little ones. We don't see what goes on behind the cameras. I tend to think it is a natural part of developing to want to be your OWN person, move away from your parents, be different, experience things--none of this is allowed by the Duggars instead their children are enslaved to duty, work and religious beliefs that are dictated to them. AWFUL!!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

OUCH, you have eloquently elucidated what I have always believed and known. Askme, please check out my hub pertaining to the relationship between family size and parenting. Most people from large families ARE poor parents because they did not receive adequate parenting when they were in the formative years. In large families, children RAISE themselves and each other, NOT THE PARENTS.

People who come from large families as parents aren't involved with their children. They do not teach their children(although they can have small families themselves). They believe that their children should learn things by osmosis. As parents, they are perfunctory at best. Compared that to people who come from small families, people from small families are more loving and nurturing parents. Of course, they received the utmost in parental care as children. Parents from small families teach their children. They believe that parents are the main teachers in their children's lives.

Look at celebrities who come from large families. As parents, they are uninvolved in their children's lives. They are of the school that children should take care of themselves. Celebrities who come from small families. although they may have large families themselves, are always there and involved in their children's lives. As I have said before, people from large families are DIFFERENT from us normal folks. They are on a DIFFERENT planet and in a DIFFERENT world. They are simply not normal. Please CHECK out my two hubs, The Large Family is Pathological, Parts 1 &2, these hubs hit the nail on the head. Another hub is Children from Small Families FARE Better than Children from Large Families-HERE'S WHY. I have received a lot of negative commentary and attacks (which I DELETED) from the LARGE FAMILY EMPIRE!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

@Askme, I have also written hubs on the oldest children in the large families. One young woman attacked me, stating that she was sick and tired of oldest children in large families being categorized as slaves. She loudly proclaimed that she was not a slave but admitted some of the condition which classified her as such. Well, oldest children in large families are SLAVES,how else would YOU describe them. I would rather be in the tenth circle of Hell or in a Siberian gulag in Kolyma than to be the oldest child in a large family. I would even wish that on my most infernal enemy. I feel sorry for those poor, poor children.

Oldest children in large families have NO of the prestige and status that oldest children have in small(2 children per household) and medium sized(3-4 children per household). Oldest children in small families have the glamour, hipness, and coolness of being the oldest child. Oldest children in large families are the put upon ones. They are the oldest but there is nothing glorious in their position. I would say that the position of the oldest child in large families is analogous to a forced laborer and an enslaved person.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Sorry for the typo, stating NO of the prestige instead of NONE of the prrestige. Computer keys were stuck, got them fixed. Have a Happy Weekend!


ruth 2 years ago

I only got one child who is very care of so zehr please keep your mouth shut you don't know anything about my family


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Ruth, pay no mind to zehr. Parents of small families are oftentimes BETTER parents than parents of large families. At least Ruth, you are raising your child and giving him/her individualized attention. Parents of large families DON'T do that. They are busy popping them out and giving them to the older children to raise. It is the oldest/older children of large families who are the REAL PARENTS, not the parents themselves.

Ruth, you are going to get such hatred from parents of large families who ENVY small families because the latter have opportunities, amenities, and parental time that they WILL NEVER HAVE. The psychosocial and socioeconomic environment of large families are dismal at best and abysmal at worst. Study a person from a large family and you will see that he/she has a poverty/scarcity consciousness, do not want and/or strive for better socioeconomic opportunities, is happy living at a poverty level, live in packs w/o appreciating the concept of privacy, and are uncultured and do not appreciate the higher human needs. People from large families can aptly be described as disadvantaged socioeconomically, socioculturally, and psychologically.


2 years ago

I agree. Also, god would not want you ti risk your life for a child that is NOT here yet. How about Jim BOB show some control if ya know what I mean.


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

Agreed. The Duggars are no better than the Boko Haram kidnappers of 276 Nigerian school girls who are opposed to girls getting an education and believe young girls should be married off and start having babies immediately. Religion or whatever belief it is that a female's sole purpose on earth is to have babies and have babies until your womb can no longer hold a baby is beyond stupid, cruel and insane!!


spectator 2 years ago

Wow every body has something to say whether positive or negative. ......I clearly understand from both sides of the fence. ...but this is reality all man made laws vs God's law in which the Duggars are following. ...how much attention is needed I see them all doing things together most families can't even get alone to do....what's wrong with having the oldest children help with the younger ones? That has been going on for decades in families and will always continue. .. ....some people even mentioned a nanny? They are the main abusers just like foster care baby sitters(the majority of them) why have strangers baby sit for a large amount of money to even do a job,vs having real family that know you well teach or baby sit out of love instead of a money deal all the time,that's the problem with America today everything is all money. ....no love,peace or respect no more......we all know regardless of who you are or your economic status it takes a village to raise a child. ..... people will always have something to say whether you're doing good or bad......every body is on the out side looking in and judging people and situations but no one is on inside to really know what's going on(just assuming).....it all sounds like stereo type bull.......


spectator 2 years ago

It's seems funny but extremely sad how these mother's with so called less kids(small families) are killing and abandoning their 1,2 or 3 children. .......but a woman with 19+ kids still have healthy, safe,well tooken care of kids....not to mention a husband that is still around after all the years and kids very much involved ....lol....most people pray for that type of love and family bond....and you people are bitching?wow.......come on......


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

@Spectator, oldest children in large and very large families are oftentimes forced to raise younger siblings, thus missing out on THEIR OWN childhood and adolescent years. The majority of oldest children RESENT,even HATE raising younger siblings. This phenomena is called the parentified child.

No child should raise another child. That is the function of parents. Ms. Duggar keeps inanely popping them out, giving them to the older daughters to raise. That is totally abusive and unfair to the oldest daughters. However, the Duggars aren't the only large family who does this. This "parental" behavior is typical and commonplace in large families.

In large and very large families, parents seldom or never raise their children. They force their oldest children to be the parents which is evil. Oldest children are children themselves and are not psychologically equipped to raise and teach younger siblings. That is the parents' job but parents of large families have children ad infinitum without considering the ramifications of their act on the remaining children.

The Duggars are poor excuse of parents. They aren't involved in their children's lives. The children raise themselves as in the majority of large families. While a SMALL percentage of parents of small families neglect their children, the MAJORITY are intelligent, concerned, and loving parents who are ACTIVELY involved in their children's lives and care about their futures. Studies show that the most neglect occur in large and very large families where the older children are waylaided and left on their own while the younger/youngest children receive the most parental care.

There are more pathologies common to large families including teenage pregnancy, delinquency, and other deleterious activities than in small families. Children in large and very large families are more often poor to impoverished than their counterparts in small families. They also end up the poorest socioeconomically. Spectator, you do not know what you are talking about. You know nothing about the subject. I studied the family, large and small and overall, small families are better for the family, particular children, than the large family.

People had large families when they did not know better and there were no advanced contraception. With more education and advanced contraception plus more opportunities in addition to urbanization, families became smaller.

Educated and intelligent people have small families because they know the BENEFITS of small families to the parents and children alike. It is only the uneducated and unintelligent who have large families as there are detriments to parents, particularly the mother, of having so many children. Children are also negatively impacted by large family life. Please get real, Spectator.


spectator 2 years ago

gmwilliams.....again your playing God judging people. ...you have a right as a citizen to your own opinion however your wrong in many aspects. ....you sound like you stereo type people as if you know them personally. ...as I mentioned before people educated, with smaller families are no different,have you seen the news a mom just killed 3 of her kids......3,2 and 2months old....she was educated married and come from a good childhood. ...just as a point I'm making. ....reality television is the business and people get paid for that purpose. ......yeah children do need attention but how much?should they be smothered I mean come on they need to learn to grow up(not fast) but be a little independent,that's what's required more now. .....life isn't a fairly tale...lol the school systems are even requiring toddlers to read in pre-school. ...another example,so in a way they are growing up faster now because more is required. ...so don't blame me gmwilliams blame the government system(no love all money game) ......everybody and family is totally different in regards to having large families. .....the families I know are church people that follows God's will,they're educated and high powerful positions. ...yet they still come home to their lovely families, spend quality time,eat together, pray,take vacations etc most of the children end up falling in their parents foot steps being educated themselves. ....some families are strong and know how to multi task ,put and keep it all together. .....as I mentioned it's your opinion though.


spectator 2 years ago

gmwilliams. ....I understand you may have studied small and large families but so did I.....most likely the people you studied and the people I studied may have been different. .....from many factors. .....don't get me wrong it is very wrong for a mother to have babies and just give them to the oldest children to raise. ....I don't condone that at all....I'm just saying a lot of times especially in my research most older girls take on the mother role to help and guide the younger siblings. ....not take over full time.......and as long as they weren't forced, brain washed or coerced into it,then I don't see a problem.....if that is the case,then it's to bad those older kids are being failed......reality t.v. is making them look good by enforcing their ratings. .....


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

spectator, We also have a "right" to disagree, voice our opinions and state our positions.

With the World over populated, resources dwindling away, most of my generation (those born in the 50's and the 60's) learned long ago that it was wise and very caring to have 2 children MAXIMUM. It is less drain on the environment and parents.

19 and counting is obviously NOT all religious based. Why else would these two have a TV show. This is their claim to fame. Irresponsibly having children they cannot possibly love and nurture.

It is WRONG, very WRONG and that is my "right" to express.


spectator 2 years ago

Askme. .....I totally understand your point of view to your opinion as well....I'm far from the enemy here lol.....my point was it was based on a t.v show and your right it is definitely claim to fame.....in other words everything they do is in their contract(including having kids)which is very wrong. .....


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

Ok Spector, that's an entirely different matter--never mind. And if you are old enough, you will get that one--as the Miss Emily Lattila character on the original SNL would say.

Peace out.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

@Askme, SOME people just DON'T get it at all. Children in large families DON'T receive the prerequisite parental attention. They are ON THEIR OWN very early. They MUST swim or sink. They MUST also depend upon either each other or on themselves as their "parents" are often unavailable.

For example, Mark Wahlberg indicated that he was on his own because his parents were unavailable. As a result of being unavailable, he indicated that he was involved in less than positive activities. This is quite de rigueur for children in large families.

They are also very envious and angry at children from smaller, more affluent families who receive more parental attention and time. Have you noticed Askme that many children from large families are quite venomous towards those from small families. Children from small families have the things that children from large families DON'T have. They are not like normal children but exist in a peripherial universe.

Children in large families are LACKING and at a DISADVANTAGE. They are less healthy because they consume inferior food products as meats and higher quality foods are expensive. Of course, this poor nutrition affects their physical and mental development.

They also have no medical/health care because such care is expensive. They are unhealthy because of the poor nutrition and medical/health care. My cousins who are from a large family of 8 children were the most malnoourished children. They NEVER went to doctors and were generally unhealthy.

Children from large families have poor quality of clothing at the most minimum level. They have to depend upon donations or clothing from second hand stores as their parents can ill afford to buy them clothes. They must often work after school and/or weekends to get the things that normal children have. Yes, children from large families have to earn their keep from childhood. Oftentimes, their schoolwork suffer because they have to work to attain things beyond the rudiments.

You and I have parents and relatives from large families. Large family life stunts children in myriad ways. They tend to be ineffective parents because they came from parenting that was ineffective. They have a LACK, SCARCITY, and POVERTY consciousness. They see that as a normal lifestyle. They also do not value intellectual attainment as there were no books in their homes and in addition to that, parents of large families do not stress intellectual and educational attainment and achievement, they are concerned with mere survival and just getting a job, not a career.

I read an article in the NEW YORK DAILY NEWS that children from large families are the poorest socioeconomically and they achieve poor socioeconomic results throughout their adulthood as opposed to children from small families who are higher earners throughout life ( wish I kept that article). Children from large families are also low academic achievers for the reasons I have mentioned before.

The environments of children from large families is a haphazard and survivalist one. It is also a harsh one. Have you noticed that children from large families are more roughstrewned and hardscrabbled than children from small families. Mark Wahlberg and Madonna are examples of this. The saying that children from large families are more compassionate of others is pure myth. It is often the opposite; they are tough and ruthless towards others. They are more cynical and belligerent towards others in response to their environment. In my experience, the children from large families HAD NEXT TO NOTHING. In my elementary and high school, it was the children from large families who asked for money, books, and other normal childhood/teenage things. If one loaned things to these children, you had to beg to get them back; they SELDOM return things. They kept/treasured such things for dear life.

I will not discuss the anomalies of large family life. I have done this ad infinitum. I just want to say people have to possess a degree of abnormality from the mid-20th to this postmodern 21st century to have a large family(6 or more children). Large families were fine when people DIDN'T know any better and in MORE agrarian times when children were needed to work the land. Large families are NO LONGER NECESSARY in these postmodern times. In fact, large families are atavistic and outmoded now. What FOR? Come on, really now!

Large families have NO place in these modern times. There should be penalization, including a punitive tax, for those who elect to have a large family. People have to possess some degree of mental challenge and/or mental obtuseness to produce a large family. Peace to you Askme and have a wonderful weekend.


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

EXACTLY GM, the large families as free labor for farms is a thing of the past. Even farmers have technology these days and actual human labor is not as much.

Agree with everything you stated here.

In areas where there are larger families around Southern CA, there is a drain on the eco system. More trash, more use of water (we are in a drought), crowded mess!

Whatever happened to having 1-2 children to replace you and your mate? I remember that being a BIG issue back in the 70's when the FIRST earth day celebration was invented.

I had a friend who used to say "when the kids outnumber the parents, there is only trouble". I kept that rule!!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Askme, trying to explain logic to some people is analogous to a Roman explaining the virtues of civilization to a Hun. One has a one in a multillion shot. What is the deal of having a large family. Good God.

Don't obtuse people know that it is wrong and heinous to have more children than one can reasonably support, love, and educate. It is going to get REAL right now. How can a person who loves children subject them to want and poverty? How can a person who loves children subject their children to inferior nutrition, no health/medical care, and no cultural/educational enrichment? How can a person who loves children make them be on the outside looking in, wishing that they were like other families who have a socioeconomic better life? How can a person who loves children force them to endure a lifetime of poverty and being at the bottom because the children could not afford to further their education?

As I have stated before, there is a place in Hell for parents of large/very large families. I find that people who uncaring having a lot of children to be EVIL in the first degree. How COULD they? I staunchly believe that parents should have 1-2 children. In that way, children can receive the most individualized of parental care and affection. There is also monies beyond the bare necessities-money to live like a human being instead of living at the lowest common denominator. To knowingly subject children to poverty because of incessant breeding is child abuse.

When will people learn. It is stupid and asinine to have a large family because parents do not have a span of control. This means that a child in the family will be enlisted to raise younger siblings. That DOESN'T make logical sense at all. It seems to me that these "parents" who have large families do not possess a high level of empathy nor intelligence. If they did, they would realize how wrong their actions are.

Well, people who are dysfunctional refuse to acknowledge their dysfunction. They prefer to believe that there is NOTHING wrong with them when in fact, there is something grievously wrong with them. The late Dr. David Hawkins, a psychiatrist, indicated that there was a Luciferian conversion. That is inverse logic where up is down, down is up, wrong is right, and right is wrong.

The Duggars are just a microcosm of large families. They are askewed and abnormal but refuse to realize it but the rest of humanity see the abnormality. I always believed in a small family from the time I was a child. I saw the hardship that children from large/very large families go through and this makes them psychologically, even psychically damaged.

Such children are often highly territorial, emotionally needy, and always confrontational because they had to grow up in an environment where it is survival of the strongest and most cunning. Children in large families have to become adults LONG before it is appropriate. Many of them indulge in petty crime in order to just survive. If you see a child working, chances are that he/she is from a large family, either buying things that other normal children have or helping to support the family.

You and I are on the same wavelength regarding large families. I DETEST them, besides there is NO LONGER a need for python and anaconda sized families today. There are social networks for people to join. Besides from the mid-20th century on, large families are nothing but a detriment to the father, especially the mother and children. People must THINK, come on now!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

@Askme, there is a forum post on a similar subject: http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/107007. While most people asserted that women who have large famlies have some type of mental condition, there are proponents from the large family camp who assert that there is nothing wrong with children living in a state of constant struggle with inferior food, clothing, in addition to poor health care. One propopent went as far to assert that children don't need amenities, they are happy with castoffs, throwaways, and inferior quality goods. This person went so far to state that small famlies should be pitied. So I REPLIED and give the poster a taste of his/her own medicine. Do you believe that this poster has multiple degrees and still have poverty level consciousness. Large family people have a different, inverse way of thinking. They are content with next to nothing and BELIEVE that everyone should live the same way. Of to write 2 hubs.

God, the callousness and uncivilization of people from large families are astounding to say the least A Hun is more civilized and cultured than many people of large families. They really do prefer to live an existence akin to animals. However, animals do not know any better but they do but see living at the lowest denominator as superior to the way normal, civilized people live. UNREAL The more I delve into large family culture and psychology, the more nonplussed I am. Dear God Almighty, some people really like to live a basic existence. Poverty-large families-poverty. Talk about hoi polloi!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Askme, the forum topic is http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/107007

Couldn't access before because of a period after the link. Tried to erase it but my computer went down. I am childfree; however, nothing incenses me more than for parents to have more children than they can provide a good quality of life for in this postmodern era of advanced contraception. Is it me or just parents of large families really DON'T care if their children look as if they were orphans. Guess not. How can a rational person rationalize poverty and want? Something is inherently evil about these parents. Have a nice night, well , going to write some hubs.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Askme, it totally amazes me that there are those from large/very large families who acknowledge the very things we state regarding such families but go into attack mode, saying that we are wrong which we state that their familial conditions are dysfunctional at best and pathological at worst.

I started a thread as to why parents knowingly have large/very large familiels, knowing that they are placing their children in situations of socioecnomic penury and want. Well, one poster, indicated that I was totally wrong and that "most" large families she knew were socioeconomically affluent,loving, and had "every" socioeconomic advantage. She wanted links. I informed the dolt that I studied the family extensively in college, read several books on the subject, and had numerous family members and friends from large/very large families to whom poverty and want were part of their childhoods. She again said I was wrong. Another genius admitted to what I stated regarding the poverty, inferior food(this poster grew up on powdered foods and food byproducts in addtion to having no medical care) etc. but indicated that all was "fine", Askme, there is an inverse logic and psychology in large/very large families. A third poster indicated that if I came from a loving large family, I would not think the way I do regarding large/very families. I and most intelligent/educated person are vehemently against such families for valid reasons. What makes people so obsessed with having a lot of children. It's NOT necessary in this postmodern era of advanced conception. People had large families because there was HARDLY ANY birth control available and they did not know better. What freaking planet are these retards on? Large/very large families are detrimental to father, especially mothers and children. Children are individuals, not numbers nor cogs. They need individualized attention and things beyond mere food, clothing, and shelter. I can't believe that people can be so obtusely thick and incomprehensibly dense.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Notice how people rationalize things when they know it's WRONG or inherently DYSFUNCTIONAL or ABERRANT!


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

You are sooooo right GM. Yes, people rationalize things that they know in their heart is wrong. I've seen that happen over and over and over. You hit the nail on the head!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Askme, you should have seen the responses that I have received on my thread as to what makes parents unknowingly have a large/very large family. Two posters from large/very large families acknowledged what I stated in the original post. When I told the challenged ones that they agreed with me, they went into a tirade, saying that I was ignorant and a fool. See the attack mode. If they were happy with their childhoods, they would not have attacked me. They attack because SUBCONSCIOUSLY their childhood was not as happy as it seems.

People who are happy don't go into attack mode when THE TRUTH is told. One poster, a mother of a large/very large family, told me that there were no poor people from large families and I was wrong. This is a supposedly educated woman. I wonder if her education is in her @@@@. Studies show a correlation between large/very large families and poverty. Are these people delusionally stupid or what? The psychology and logic of the large/very large family is different from that of us normal thinking folks who know better. Have a Blessed Night, Askme.

P.S. If they READ some books on the detriments of large families, they would learn something about how detrimental large family life is especially to women and children. None of the posters would admit that their childhood was less than normal? They believe that their childhood was normal. Told you that the large family is dysfunctional. When a person from a small family interacts with people from large families, they are in another, bizarro planet of inverse logic and psychology. It really boggles the mind. I am a very strong advocate for small families as you are and any normal, logical thinking person would be.


ruth 2 years ago

The duggars children are thick because they home school they would.do well in state school my son who is 15 is doing very well in a state school and he won a very high award for form tutor award but school that was won a prince william award for been very safe and best school in wales uk that why duggars children are very thick they would not have the brain like my son who are very braining so beat that duggars


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

Ruth, congrats to you and your son!

The Duggars are thick because they lack social skills. If you are only around your own family and isolated you never grown and learn.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Askme, your last post is so true. Contrary to the stupid myth that children from large families have great social skills, the OPPOSITE is exactly the case. They don't have great social skills; in fact, they are quite awkward around strangers because they only associate with each other as children and adolescents. It is us from small families who have the better social skills because we mingled and had friends with non-related children. People from large families are more backward and more parochial than people from small families because we had friends and associates who WEREN'T family. In a book by Ellen Peck about only children, one husband, an only, married a woman from a very large family. The husband remarked that the only people his wife associated with were FAMILY while he had non-related friends. Yes, people from large families are STRANGE, WEIRD, ABNORMAL, and are QUITE INSULAR. You would be too if all you associated and were friends with were FAMILY MEMBERS. Notice children from large families state that they have built-in friends; how sad. I am glad to be an only child but I get to choose the quality and content of my family while people from large families are more or less STUCK with their family.


KCarr49 2 years ago

Hi, Askme! This is my first Hub post(just signed up after reading your article(or is this a blog?). Anyway, I've read about half the comments, but it's gonna take a little bit to get to the other half, so if you've answered this already, forgive me.

I've been reading about the Duggar's today(Michelle has been found to have said some pretty nasty things about the LGBT community), and came across this write-up. I've read a lot of people saying negative things about large families in this feed(not bashing, just observing) that come from one womb, but I, personally, want to have a semi-large family via adoption.

Currently the happy mother of 1 (that is biologically mine), and want to have 1 more that will be biologically mine. I then(well, after a few years) want to start adopting older kids and toddlerish to preschool aged(maybe some small sibling groups) in a few years. Every adoption will be different, therefore, I and my spouse would have to look over everything before another adoption. Over a 20 year time-span, I would love to give a home to as many children as possible, but keep the maximum children in home at one time to no more than a big SUV can hold, probably around 6 kids with room for me and hubby(he's semi on board, one of the reasons I want to wait).

Here's my question: Do you(or anyone else still keeping up with this interesting article) think a large family built in this way would be as detrimental to the family unit/children's well being as a family group like the Duggar's. Understand that I'm for the most part, in agreement with you and others with the Duggar family being somewhat harmful parents.

I've not been a part of a large family, but I see a need for loving families for children in need. I would think it could be fun in some aspects, but not in others. However, family dynamics in a one or two child household can have drawbacks as well, like any family.

Fascinating conversation and would love to hear an opinion!


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

Kcarr49 Not an easy question to answer. Calls for a lot of thought and consideration. My thinking is too many children born to parents or adopted means some of the children will lose out on attention by parents and miss out on emotional development. Older children whether biological or adopted will, like the Duggars get relegated to unpaid babysitters.

I am thinking adopted children need more attention and love than biological ones. On a personal note, I've had friends who grew up as adopted children and all the ones I know have deep insecurity problems, One friend was part of a custody battle between her adopted parents and the biological parents who were teens when my friend was born and the bio grandparents place my friend for adoption. When my friend's bio parents became of age, they filed for custody. It was a long, long emotional battle and damage was done to my friend who has life long trust issues. The other friend was abandoned in a bar by his 20 something mother who "got tired of him" again trust issues and some drug problems.

There are successful adoption stories. I have one friend who was taken away from his bio parents who were druggies. He was a toddler with a major diaper infection and was living in a rat infested, roach infested barn with two drugged out parents. He was placed in foster care until the age of 7 and did not talk or walk. Authorities were getting ready to place him in an institution but a family adopted him and he suddenly blossomed. Today he has two Master degrees, a successful career, wife and family.

I guess if you have the time, commitment and able to have a very thick skin to survive probable anger issues-among other problems-you can have a successful adopted family. How would you feel if an adopted child was mean to your bio child? Could you over come feeling protective of your own child over the adopted one? I am sure children with abandonment issues might act out in a way to test you and how much you love them over your own flesh and blood.

Difficult question, like I said. I guess what i resent most about the Duggars is their children seem more like objects not individuals allowed to develop and be who they are met to be.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Askme, in large families, children are objects instead of individuals. It is quite ironic that parents of large families claim to love children when in fact, the opposite is true. In large families, children are cogs and dehumanized. It is in small families where children are loved and seen/treated as individuals.

This is why so many people who come from large families are needy i.e. Madonna with her attention seeking antics, Michael Jackson, Mark Wahlberg, Ava Gardner, and others who come from large families are always seeking attention in one way or another. Let's not forget our poster boy, Alec Baldwin, he is always acting out in one way or another. You do not see celebrities from small families acting so outrageously. Of course not, they received the prerequisite attention in their formative years. Children in large families are doomed from the time they are born. They are to be pitied really!


Askme profile image

Askme 2 years ago Author

Alec Baldwin...good one GM. He's the poster boy for sure!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

You see Askme, children who come from large families are deprived in some way. They are emotionally and psychologically needy because they didn't receive enough parental attention. These abovementioned celebrities are noted examples.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Askme, another thought came to me. It is also ironic how many people purport that children in large families have superb social skills. Really now! I have noticed that children from large families have the worst social skills. They are clannish and insular in addition to being distrustful of those outside the family. They have a fear of people as opposed to us in small families who see family in all, not just blood. We people from small families have non-related people as family. We are also more trusting of outsiders. That explains why people from small families are more universalistic than those from large families who are parochial and insular. What they fail to realize that strangers can be kinder than blood family. People from large families really could care less about other people. They are some of the most selfish and prejudiced people around. They do not share with others. In fact, they have the attitude of us vs them, sad really!


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 22 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Good morning Askme, long time no see. I received quite a disturbing commentary(which I deleted). It was in response to one of my hubs on the large family relating to how children in large families are left to their own devices. The commentator derided parents of small families who gave their children every advantage & gave them opportunities which the commentator did not have. It seemed as if the commentator was envious(as all people from large families are) because of the attention such children received in comparison. The commentator further remarked that it was stupid for children to associate with parents as they aren't any fun. See how askewed is that. I associated with my parents & had fun. I feel sorry for children who mainly interfaced with siblings, seldom parents. This commentator continued to state that he/she will have a large family also & that children can be raised effectively on a shoestring. Again, the large family psychology in action. All of my articles on the large family proves this poverty/scant mentality that all large families have. They have no cognizance of life beyond pure primitive existence. It is really sad enough to make me cry. No child should endure such a life, prisoners of war, slaves, & inmates have better lives & living conditions that the average child in a large/very large family.


Askme profile image

Askme 22 months ago Author

Hi GM, Yes long time no see. I've been crossing the country 2x in the last 6 months. Los Angeles to Washington State to Atlanta back to LA and back to the great Pacific Northwest. I'm fairly certain the ambition, independence and drive I have would not be there had I been lost in a large family.

Have you watched any of the current reality shows about multiple wives and multiple children, like "Sister Wives" or "My 5 wives"? I wonder if children in these sort of families get more attention than the Duggar kids or maybe having at least a mother for every 3, 4 or 5 kids allows for more attention since it is similar to a single mom raising kids? What do you think?


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 22 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

NOPE, don't watch such shows. Don't even watch the Duggars. Dysfunctional families are not my cup of tea. Yes, have multiple mothers means that children will receive more attention.


Askme profile image

Askme 22 months ago Author

I shouldn't watch either. I don't do it on a regular bases mostly because the few episodes I have seen of either show is annoying especially with the women competing for attention and being miserable. Come to think of it....not healthy for their children.


gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 22 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

My father stated when I told him people hated only children that this hatred was based upon jealousy. People hated only children because of the privileges & opportunities that others do not/wish that they would have. He further replied that people hate large families because the latter are LOOKED DOWN UPON, even DESPISED. He further elucidated that large families are the province of the uneducated, unintelligent & the ignorant.

I am ambitious, believe in having the finer things in life, & value education & other types of intellectual/cultural activities because I am an only child. When one is in a small family(1-2 children), one is afforded a life beyond the bare rudiments. One has the discretionary income to attend plays, travel, & take music/dance lessons.

Children in large families have to do without. They do not have monies for even the rudiments. One can easily tell a child from a large family-they look like orphans or abused children-they are undernourished & ill kempt. They are also uncouth & uncultured as they were not exposed to intellectual & cultural activities as their parents deem such to be a waste of time. One can describe such children as feral.

People from large families have a rough & harsh exterior. They do not have what is called class. They were raised in the most basic fashion possible. They have a brutish persona about them. They also have a poverty mentality. They are so used to surviving on crumbs that they view others with a more conducive lifestyle to be extravagant.

They have quite a different psychology from us. They live, act & think in packs. They are afraid of individuality & individualism. Privacy & doing things alone is a foreign concept to a person from a large family. They even cannot live alone but must live with a sibling. They are abnormal & strange to say the least. I have written so many hubs on the pathology, aberration, & abnormalities surrounding large families.

They are also insular & have no social skills despite their rationalization that having siblings make them more social. Complete & utter balderdash. Some of the most shy people I know are from large families. Charles Bronson was known to be very reticent regarding interviews. Michael Jackson was also known to be very shy outside of his showbiz persona. I knew a classmate, one of 19 children, who stayed to herself most of the time through elementary school.

Children from large families are not comfortable around other children. They do not associate easily with anyone outside their immediate family. They ARE clannish, they have an us vs. them mentality Anyone who has grown up around people from large families, noticed that FAMILY was the only ones present, there were hardly any non-blood people around. When one gets to be around normal people from small families, there are ALL KINDS of people, blood & non-blood relations.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working