News today that the large religious family whose name all start with a J are pregnant with the 20th baby..
This baby will be younger than the oldest sons baby.
When is enough, enough?
The last one had serous problems with premature birth.
Must be in their contract...'must pop out a child every year to ensure renewal of TV contract'!
I feel they are trying to let God control every aspect of their lives. Maybe it is not the best choice for some but for them they feel it is what they should do. The scripture verse. Happy the man who has his quiver full " speaks specifically to having a large family. Through their faith they believe birth control for them is wrong.
Sad, when a woman thinks the only important purpose in life is is having children. Women are more than mere wombs. What does her husband do for a living and how would he feed and care for all those children, if they weren't on TV?
I don't know, the only purpose in my life is my children and family. I don't really think that I am just a womb... I think I have chosen being a mother as my life's work.
I'm sure you didn't mean to say that women that have chosen to have a large family are somehow inferior to women who have chosen to focus on whatever else they find important... did you?
No Milissa, I don't mean that at all. Hold the stones. I am a Christian and have know some woman who feel that their job is to multiply and replenish the earth. They do not use birth control because they think their duty before the Lord is to have children. They are usually were not in a position to raise all the children, but continue to have them because of misinterpreted scripture. It that a little clearer?
financially they maybe ok with so many children. How about time devoted to each and every child.
Plus, science can't ascertain the health of babies of those mothers who are nearing the end of their fertility period. And she has pre eclampsia and her last baby was premature. She is a high risk pregnancy, more complications and there is a possibility of chromosomal abnormalities for her baby. Why risk it? This is just my opinion.
I'm just so tired of them... all those 'look at me, I have a bunch of kids' shows. I don't care how many kids they have, just please get out of my face!
When I hear the word, "dingbat", the Duggerds come to mind. I personally thinks its pathetic and just plain stupid. It's true when Woody Allen once said, Hollywood doesn't throw out their trash, they turn them into TV shows.
LOL.. so THAT explains why my had called "I hate the Duggars" finally got some page views yesterday after a year of nothing
I'm sick of all of the "look at my big pack of kids" shows also. Having said that, as long as they can afford to support those children, which they do--if I remember right, they own commercial rental properties or something like that-and the children are well cared for, then it's their business how many kids they have. I don't think she thinks she's just a womb. I think she loves what she's doing. I have a problem with people like the Octomom...
The problem is they have so many kids because their religion doesn't believe in birth control yet having more than 10 increases the woman's risk for death during birth. Then what would the kids do without momma there? Would her husband just simply remarry someone younger and make more babies to add to the family? This woman is playing Russian roulette with her life and the lives of her kids, in my opinion. Yes, its their business how many they have but at the same time money doesn't last forever and neither will the TV show. Then what? He loses his job, show gets cancelled and its off to the welfare line with 20 kids. Just one possible scenario.
At one time I believed that if these two people could afford to have so many children, and they were all well fed, well treated, and cared for, it was their own business how many children they had.
But, I see now it's really not their own business at all. It's BIG BUSINESS with two attention seeking media whore parents expoliting their gigantic family on a TV reality show. Eventually, mother nature herself will put a stop to them unfortunately spinning off a new reality show all about Michelle's menopausal mood swings and hot flashes which will last just long enough for the next generation to start reproducing. Oh wait, they are already doing that.
I don't know that any person or entity has the right to interfere with those who responsibly parent their children, regardless of the number. Agreeing with their religious views, political and social views is a moot subject. We are ALL brainwashed about something, and we get to figure that out for ourselves. Just because I personally would never consider trying to raise 20 children doesn't mean that it isn't the right of someone else to do so.
If this family had a history of neglect, abuse or other ills so prevalent in society, then it would be prudent for the laws that govern us to protect the individuals in that family as needed. However, until there is such evidence all the opinions about their huge family are just opinions. And quite frankly, unless those opinions are based on fact, they aren't worth much at all.
Of course their is dysfunction in this family. And whose family do you think there is not? And why would any of us presume we would know what is best for anyone more than ourselves?
the older children do most of the work and child care..as the oldest child I had a lot of responsibility.. it's really not fair and they can't get the attention they need.
I was the oldest as well. Life is not fair. That's the sum total of everything I know about life. Just because it's not fair doesn't mean that we should condemn everyone else for making it unfair. Being the middle child or youngest is also a burden. Nobody gets through family life unscathed. Whether you were an lonely only child, or whether you grew up in a herd, there are burdens to bear. And the only way to free yourself of those burdens is to get completely clear about who you are in the universe and know where your focus and center is. Then the rest doesn't matter, and how people raise their kids is between them and God, or whatever it is out there. But when there is clear abuse and harm, then it becomes legal and intervention is needed.
I understand your right to have an opinion that for you it's wrong to have so many children. And for you, that's a right decision for you. But you don't get to decide for other people what's good for them unless there is clear violation of laws and rights.
That's my point.
Are you not perhaps projecting your own feelings in your definition on 'whats fair' or not,because while the whole idea of that big a family doesnt sit well with me ,I do think those kids develop some pretty strong life skills ie responsiblity, work ethics, team players,practical skills, social skills that many of their peers find difficulty or lack period.
I think its great they learn young that taking care of one another is a family concept that later becomes absorbed into their community...and good communities make for strong towns/cities.
What freedoms do they lack?
Oldest children from large families did not have a childhood. They were constantly on 24/7/365. They probably never attended cultural and intellectual events with their classmates. They did not have alone time. How could they-they came from a large family.
They probably had little time to read a book, write, sketch, and indulge in normal, regular hobbies. Many people from large families who purport to be happy are in deep denial as many people from large families were. Oldest children in large families have chattel like status so to speak.
While other children and teenagers had extracurricular activities, oldest children from large families were often the family mascot. Large families are highly abusive to oldest children especially. Children should not be raising other children- that is the parent's job. I pity the oldest child in large familiesin that he/she neither had a carefree nor normal childhood as other children did.
My aunt, the third oldest of ten children, was on 24/7/365. She neither had a normal nor carefree childhood to speak of. As soon as she could, she left home and entered into a disastrous relationship with the first man who showed her some affection- he left her and she was pregnant! I pity children from large families, especially if they are the oldest. Their status in the family is akin to forced laborers in concentration camps.
Working from dawn to dusk without reprieve because of the innate selfishness of the parents who have children for the sake of having children, not at all considering the needs of their children. Their mantra is me, me, me,-I want children and lots of them. Children in large families do not lead normal and happy lives but quite hellish ones.
To Stacie L: I totally agree with your premise. You say that you are the oldest child growing up in similiar circumstances. I feel totally for you and all other oldest children. All children should have an as unencumbered and carefree childhood as possible. Children should be allowed to explore and to create. Many oldest children, particularly in medium large to very large families, are parentified children. This is totally abnormal, insidious, and abusive to the infinite degree. Children should not be parents before they desire to do and or ready. Parents should raise their children. If they cannot raise them, then DO NOT HAVE THEM! Pure and simple. This is why large families are totally dysfunctional- it is wrong! Now, I have said my piece.
I think that even though they have the resources to do such a thing, doesn't necessarily mean it's ok. Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's ethical or moral. The oldest children I believe should have the right to choose their own path in life and that's somewhat hard when your parents keep having children. Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you should. It's all about judgment which I think they lack in this case. Not to mention she's putting her life at risk by doing this.
It would be funnier than hell if not one of the 19 kids are not actually his. Now that would be worth broadcasting! Three of the kids has the mailman's eyes and the nose of a couple others resembles the UPS guy. And of course the facial features ofd the last kid looks a lot like their show's director. That would make an awesome spoof.
now that would be funny!
i don't think this couple ever spends time apart--that may be the problem!
No, the problem is that they do not use contraceptives! Do what you will as a couple but be intelligent regarding the situation. Intelligent and evolved humans use contraceptives when indulging. Sex does not have to equal reproduction. Only nonthinking and unevolved lifeforms reproduce each time that they have sex.
They do not use contraceptives because they believe in letting God decide.
I don't agree but it is their lives and they have the right to do what they want.
I don't see them as dysfunctional...you want dysfunctional you have to check out families like the Kardasian's, not families who want to have a lot of children.
That disgusting woman will keep popping them out until she can't possibly do it anymore.
The Duggars are totally dysfunctional. It is not only the Duggars. There is another megafamily out there- the Bates. They have 18 children and are praying to have EVEN MORE! This is totally asinity and insanity taken to the milnillionth degree.
Michelle needs to develop an outside hobby. Stop having children and get your tubes tied! Having large families was a necessity in preindustrial times because children were needed to work the land! However, in these postindustrial times with advanced contraception, having a large family is totally preposterous!
Children need individualized care from their parents. In large families, such is not the case. Parents cannot adequate care for their children in large families. Guess who assumes the parenting role? The oldest child. Oldest children in large families raise their younger siblings thus forfeiting their childhood and adolescent development.
Parents who have large families are deemed abusive parents for the reasons I have detailed. In large families, there is no such thing as equal parity regarding the children. The oldest child is overburden, overused, and underappreciated. The middle child is IGNORED. However, the youngest child often have it made in the shade. He/she is babied and pampered in ways that the other siblings are not! Let me not digress here.
The Duggars need psychiatric help. People who have a lot of children need to have some outside friends, activities, and a hobby. The women need to find some type of work-yes work. Maybe if they had outside jobs in the beginning, there would be less children!
Women who have large families are usually conservative and/or traditional in their mores. They are often passive in their approach to marital relationships with their husbands. They believe in the traditional role of women as subordinate second class citizens, instead of being equal to their husbands. There are so many psychological aspects to this subject which I will not detail here. Ms. Duggar is a challenged woman who needs serious revamping!
Oh I forgot to add that there are women who are addicted to being pregnant. These women believe that when they are pregnant- they get a rush. Many pregnant women are pampered and treated as stars. Because of this adulation, they actually look forward to being pregnant again and again. Many of these women have a deep void in their lives which only pregnancy can fill.
Many women also have a baby hunger. They love their children at that stage; however, they lose interest in that child as he/she becomes older. Hence, this woman want a new infant and presto, she become repeatedly pregnant to fulfill her infant hunger!
It's their life, all the kids are looked after, why such a strong reaction?
In large families, parents cannot properly look after their children. It is an impossibility. Parents in large families delegate the raising of younger siblings to the oldest child. This means that the oldest child has no individual life of his/her own- constantly looking after the younger ones. Oldest children in large families have no such thing as childhood and adolescent life like their peers in small families who can indulge their fancy. Children raising children is tantamount to abuse. If the parents have the child, they should raise it. If not, use contraception and/or keep it in the pants and legs closed! Amen to that! Do I hear a resounding and thunderous applause to that one! Yes, good!
I was part of a family of nine and yes I was expected to look out for my younger siblings-its called caring for one another.
Never was I in the parents role (though Im sure I tried to be occassionally).
We had chores ,that helped me learn work ethics, we had responsibilties that teachers recognised and later employers.
My friends loved coming to our house because something was always happening, and our large dining table always had extras sitting there. They felt welcome and the rule was the cook never did dishes -so that meant us kids.
We used to laugh at some friends who had to wait for summer camp to do what we took for granted.
Maybe expectations or discontent means that today some large families struggle economically, which is hard to understand ,because we certainly didnt have much either, but it was clean ,fresh and if you could grow it ,hunt it, or fish it ,we had all we needed.
And you base your certainty on what? Those kids all seem to be doing fine.
With those many kids, there's bound to be at least one who thinks their family should have been smaller. Sad part of these "big family" shows is that it is also happening at some parts of the world.. Take my country for example, Catholic dominance in the country is undeniable, and a lot of people are led to believe that contraception and birth control are wrong.. Why have 5 or more kids when you can barely feed 1? I just think this kind of TV shows can easily send the wrong message to its viewers, just my opinion.
You are so right! I believe that people should have the amount of children that they can take care of financially, emotionally, and psychologically. The average parent cannot take care of a brood of children. Result: oldest child is assigned and/or forced to raise the younger siblings= no childhood and/or adolescence of their own. The idea number of children a couple should have is 1-3 children.
by moneyfairy2 years ago
Do you think a woman with more than 8 children has a mental problem?Isn't it just a little insane to have so many children? Unless you are a gazillionaire how on earth could you afford so many children? And how much...
by WeddingConsultant8 years ago
I'm wondering if anyone had heard the same thing I have heard in the past concerning children.I have heard that your first child is the hardest because of the many life changes. Then the second one is also hard...
by Grace Marguerite Williams2 years ago
(6 or more children per household) in the postmodern, 21st century United States, being fully cognizant of the fact that they will be subjecting their children to an extremely rudimentary and primitive socioeconomic...
by Shawn May Scott5 years ago
We have for the longest time affectionatly called our children kids. Even some of the great children's hospitals are names "Sick Kids" affectionatly. Where has this term come from and why have we applied it to...
by donotfear7 years ago
Was keeping several older children in a group home. They complained of black widow spiders in their shoes. They began pulling their shoes out and turning them upside down. A black widow would fall out. I felt something...
by James Q smith8 years ago
Just a question, but it would seem if there really were no God, then Atheists couldn't exist. Is Atheism a religion? They definitely seem to be unified by a common belief.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.