Arkansas Mom Prepares for Birth of 17th Child

[DmOrtega]

All I gotta say is WOW! How do they keep all of the names straight?



LITTLE ROCK — The Duggars are once again pulling out the pink ruffles and lace as they prepare for the birth of baby number 17. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270554,00.html)

Michelle Duggar said Monday in a telephone interview from her northwest Arkansas home that the whole family is excited about the arrival of the baby girl they will name Jennifer Danielle, keeping with the family tradition of giving the child a name that begins with J.

Jennifer Danielle is due July 27.

Duggar, 40, said she was doing fine with her latest pregnancy. Although she has gotten older since she had her first child at age 21, she said, she still has plenty of energy and only minor aches and pains.

"With each baby, God's given me the grace and the energy to keep going, and they really keep you going," she said. "I feel like a 20-year-old kid, but I'm realizing my body isn't that 20-year-old. I don't get up and play the games as hard as I used to, and I try to be a little more careful."

Duggar said she and husband Jim Bob, a former state representative and U.S. senate candidate, view each phase of their children's lives as an adventure.

"I've never been a mom of a 19-year-old young man and a 17-year-old young man and woman, so every phase of parenting is an exciting adventure" Duggar said.

The Duggars home school their children at their 7,000-square foot home in Tontitown. The couple's oldest child, Joshua, is 19, and their youngest, Johanna Faith, is 19 months. Their children include two sets of twins.

Because the couple sees each child as a blessing from God, Michelle Duggar said they will, as long as she is able, accept each child they are given.

"Really, our heart is we would love to receive whatever gifts or blessings the Lord wants to give us," she said. "But I love the baby stage and I can't imagine life without having a toddler in the house."

Two of the Duggar children, Janna, 17, and Jill, 15, attended Johanna's birth at St. Mary's hospital in Rogers in 2005. Duggar said the two girls, who both have an interest in becoming midwives or nurses, may attend Jennifer's birth as well.

And though she has 16 children, Duggar said that each child is so different there are times when she feels like she knows nothing about parenting.

"Here I am a mama with her 17th child on the way, and so many people think 'Oh you've got it all figured out,"' Duggar said. "I am still learning. Just when I think I've got something figured out I try it on the next one and it doesn't work."

The Duggars' other children are John David, 17; Jessa, 14; Jinger, 13; Joseph, 12; Josiah, 11; Joy-Anna, 10; Jeremiah, 8; Jedidiah, 8; Jason, 7, James, 5; Justin, 4; and Jackson Levi, 2.

[Grace]

I saw a show about this family on tv once. They built their own house! Very cool family. You should have seen the pantry - a HUGE storeroom stocked like a mini-mart! Unfortunately, they eat a lot of garbage (IMO, based on what I saw in the show - lots of canned soups and packaged foods), but the family is able to support themselves, and they seemed so happy and involved, so more power to them, I say!! :) As someone who wasn't able to have even one child, I think it's very cool to be having 17! :eek:

[tmsl]

There was a family that I went to school with that had 17 kids and no multiple births....

[zwieback]

I saw a show about this family on tv once. They built their own house! Very cool family. You should have seen the pantry - a HUGE storeroom stocked like a mini-mart! Unfortunately, they eat a lot of garbage (IMO, based on what I saw in the show - lots of canned soups and packaged foods), but the family is able to support themselves, and they seemed so happy and involved, so more power to them, I say!! :) As someone who wasn't able to have even one child, I think it's very cool to be having 17! :eek:

If this is the same family I'm thinking of and saw on one of those TLC shows (or something similar), they were shopping at Aldi's so, the choices are a bit limited. Having that many kids, I don't see how they could afford to shop anywhere else. And I agree, more power to them because they seem to be doing okay by themselves. Financially speaking, it's hard enough for a lot of people to have 1 or 2 children.

I'm pregnant with baby #2 and I have to say that will be enough. I cannot imagine having 17 kids and being pregnant that much. Holy moly! Can you imagine the money that has been spent on hospital bills just for the pregnancies alone??? :eek: I hope they have good insurance

[badunnin]

There was a family that I went to school with that had 17 kids and no multiple births....

A good friend of mine is one of 15, no multiples either. FUN family at Christmas! :D

[cumulus]

If this is the same family I'm thinking of and saw on one of those TLC shows (or something similar), they were shopping at Aldi's so, the choices are a bit limited. Having that many kids, I don't see how they could afford to shop anywhere else. And I agree, more power to them because they seem to be doing okay by themselves. Financially speaking, it's hard enough for a lot of people to have 1 or 2 children.

I'm pregnant with baby #2 and I have to say that will be enough. I cannot imagine having 17 kids and being pregnant that much. Holy moly! Can you imagine the money that has been spent on hospital bills just for the pregnancies alone??? :eek: I hope they have good insurance

I'm pretty sure it's the same family. EEK!

I can't even imagine... Any bets on the kid's name? I think they should break tradition, and name him/her something totally crazy- like Michael ;)

[lindrusso]

I cannot imagine it either, but I've seen the specials on this family and they are amazing!

And imagine being pregnant for what amounts to about 14 years of your life???? :eek: The wear and tear on your body alone!

[leightx]

Surely I can't be the only one that finds the Duggars disturbing? It's no so much the number of kids, as the way they are parenting (or not parenting) them. :confused:

[TieKitty]

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

[beacooker]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/45/175866636_d86626afc4.jpg

[testkitchen45]

Surely I can't be the only one that finds the Duggars disturbing? It's no so much the number of kids, as the way they are parenting (or not parenting) them. :confused:

What are they supposedly doing, or not doing, that bothers you?

I've seen this family on TV too. While I realize that the family relationships were probably somewhat sanitized for the TV special, the deep love and respect these family members have for each other were quite evident. Seems to me that they're parenting just fine.

[testkitchen45]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/45/175866636_d86626afc4.jpg

Fairly funny pic, but hugely disrespectful of a successful family. It's not as if they're asking for government handouts to finance their efforts. They are self-sufficient and, from what I can tell, happy and doing great. It wouldn't be my choice to have so many children, but when they are so obviously taking full responsibility for raising them well, and in a self-sufficient fashion, why slam them? :confused:

[pointerhaven]

My father is one of 16! My friend is one of 17! Now I'm one of six and I can't imagine having more sisters or their drama to deal with...

My grandparents needed farm hands, that I understand, but this I can't.

[Kathy B]

My father is one of 16! My friend is one of 17! Now I'm one of six and I can't imagine having more sisters or their drama to deal with...



Pointerhaven, I am curious as to what kind of relationships your dad and his 15 other siblings have with each other and with their parents. Also your friend. How do/did they feel about having such a large family? Did they feel as though they had a good childhood?

I always wonder about families of this size, because it seems like it would be difficult to feel like you ever had your parents' attention since it would be divided among so many. But maybe not.....do you know what your dad or friend think about it?

[beacooker]

Fairly funny pic, but hugely disrespectful of a successful family. It's not as if they're asking for government handouts to finance their efforts. They are self-sufficient and, from what I can tell, happy and doing great. It wouldn't be my choice to have so many children, but when they are so obviously taking full responsibility for raising them well, and in a self-sufficient fashion, why slam them? :confused:

I actually had never heard of the family until this thread, and I have no opinion of them. But I had seen this picture a few weeks ago, thought it was kind of funny, and remembered it when I saw this. Is it the same family?

[SandyM]

I can't judge these people. I've seen the special on tv - the kids seem respectful and loving, and they seem, for all intents and purposes, to have it together. That might be made-for-tv, but who knows? I remember them eating one of their favorite meals (the content of which escapes me at this time), and it seemed rather disgusting to me, but I wasn't eating it. :p

My ex-brother-in-law is 56, and his 30 year old wife is pregnant with their 5th child - they'll have 5 kids under the age of 7. He has a good job, she home-schools, and the kids are taken care of and well-loved. They're also letting God determine the size of their family.

I just worry about the dad being 74 when the youngest graduates from high school. Perhaps it'll be fine - I don't know.

[leightx]

Anne - I'm cracking up at that picture! :p

What are they supposedly doing, or not doing, that bothers you?

Have you taken a look at the links (http://www.jimbob.info/links.html)on their website? They are Quiver Fulls (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull) - a religion that subordinates women (to Biblical extremes). They are raising their kids to believe that dinosaurs and elephants walked alongside man (Noah even saved them on the ark)! I have a huge, HUGE problem with those that teach terribly faulty, inaccurate and dangerous quasi-science to their kids, yet still take advantage of all the benefits of modern medicine.

They are raising their kids in isolation from those that don't think exactly like them. Yes, they are in contact with family members, but they aren't exposed to other people with different thoughts and views on the world - they don't even go to church. Is this a healthy way to raise intelligent, thinking adults? Or is that not the goal of the Duggars? I have a feeling its more about submission to God (and Jim Bob), to the exclusion of anything else.

There is much more that I disagree with, but I'll stop now before I offend even more people. Again, I want to stress that I am not at all against large families, I just strongly disagree with the sentiment that their kids are "well-raised".

[KAnn]

Surely I can't be the only one that finds the Duggars disturbing? It's no so much the number of kids, as the way they are parenting (or not parenting) them. :confused:


You are NOT the only one. I find it offensive on many levels.

[ChristyMarie]

You are NOT the only one. I find it offensive on many levels.

I also agree.

From the "blanket training" of infants to the religious subordination of the women to the isolation. It also seems that the older children raise the younger ones - the "buddy system" - instead of the parents.

I do wonder what the husband does for a living to support them all.

[Kathy B]

Have you taken a look at the links (http://www.jimbob.info/links.html)on their website? They are Quiver Fulls (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull) - a religion that subordinates women (to Biblical extremes). They are raising their kids to believe that dinosaurs and elephants walked alongside man (Noah even saved them on the ark)! I have a huge, HUGE problem with those that teach terribly faulty, inaccurate and dangerous quasi-science to their kids, yet still take advantage of all the benefits of modern medicine.

They are raising their kids in isolation from those that don't think exactly like them. Yes, they are in contact with family members, but they aren't exposed to other people with different thoughts and views on the world - they don't even go to church. Is this a healthy way to raise intelligent, thinking adults? Or is that not the goal of the Duggars? I have a feeling its more about submission to God (and Jim Bob), to the exclusion of anything else.

There is much more that I disagree with, but I'll stop now before I offend even more people. Again, I want to stress that I am not at all against large families, I just strongly disagree with the sentiment that their kids are "well-raised".

In regards to these thoughts, I would have to say that it is very possible that the family might have similar thoughts about us. :eek: They might be appalled at the idea of sending kids to public schools where they believe that anyone and everyone has access to shaping their minds. And if they BELIEVE the things they teach their children, then of course that is what they would want them to learn. I am sure there are others who think like these parents, even if they have smaller families.

One of my brothers and his wife home-schooled their 4 kids and kept them pretty isolated from anyone outside their religious/home-school group in their school-age years. Even our family had only minimal contact with them (once a year for half a day at Thanksgiving). As they reached HS age they gradually began loosening the reins. Their kids are quite intelligent, and they have strong opinions about religion/politics that mirror their mom and dad's. As far as my brother and his wife are concerned....mission accomplished.

[leightx]

In regards to these thoughts, I would have to say that it is very possible that the family might have similar thoughts about us. :eek:

I'm sure that they do! And like me, they have the right to raise their kids however they see fit (within the confines of the law of course), and teach them whatever they like. It doesn't mean that I have to approve of their choices, or not be appalled as to what they're teaching their kids, however.

[Gumbeaux]

They are raising their kids to believe that dinosaurs and elephants walked alongside man (Noah even saved them on the ark)! I have a huge, HUGE problem with those that teach terribly faulty, inaccurate and dangerous quasi-science to their kids".

I agree 100%. Stange thinking like this causes more bizarre thinking and theories to make history, geology, and biology "fit".

I know I guy that believes that God that created the fossil record to "trick" people as a test to seperate those who "believe" from those that don't. :eek:

[Grace]

As long as they are peaceful people, who cares what they think? We're going to go around now and make sure everyone thinks exactly the same thing? It was once considered "strange thinking" to say the world was round or that the earth wasn't the center of the universe. "Strange ideas" are often the starting points for new research and new theories. Not saying I agree with them (by any stretch), but really, who cares if they want to believe that the dinosaurs were on the Ark? Some people don't believe in the Ark at all. Some people don't believe that the Bible is true at all. My FIL says it's all a bunch of "fairy tales". Lots of people raise their kids to be atheists. Ultimately, all kids grow up and can decide for themselves what they believe. DH doesn't believe his Dad's theory about the Bible. He did his own research and came to his own conclusions despite what his father says. Those kids will be just fine. Their parents can't shelter them forever. And God gave each of us our own brains. We are not remote controlled forever by our parents. But wait, maybe I'm a strange thinker too since I believe God gave us our brains. Not everyone believes that....

[aggie94]

The Duggars' other children are John David, 17; Jessa, 14; Jinger, 13; Joseph, 12; Josiah, 11; Joy-Anna, 10; Jeremiah, 8; Jedidiah, 8; Jason, 7, James, 5; Justin, 4; and Jackson Levi, 2.

Jinger???? :eek:

[Beth H]

You are NOT the only one. I find it offensive on many levels.

Same here. I started to post earlier, and then backed off. It is not healthy for a woman to have seventeen children, I don't think. And - I know families in the nineteenth century used to be larger, but women's life expectancy was a lot shorter, then too (largely because of the risks inherent with childbirth).

[Gumbeaux]

Jinger???? :eek:


It looks like they are hung up on "J's" and forced something to work that they shouldn't have. Poor girl, she'll have her named mis-spelled for life. :D

[petitechef]

just the fact that this woman has been pregnant for pretty much 20 years straight makes me tired for her.

i was the special on tv when they build their new house, they seemed like a loving, respectful family. All the power to them

also...they are very lucky to have that many children and they are all healthy, physically and mentally. As she ages she needs to be careful about this. I know each one is a blessing but she needs to be careful.

[Robyn1007]

It looks like they are hung up on "J's" and forced something to work that they shouldn't have. Poor girl, she'll have her named mis-spelled for life. :D

Eh, well, mis-spelled names are pretty common. I can't tell you the number of ways people try to spell Robyn. Usually it's just y vs. i but I have seen some really strange ones and even know someone who spells it Robynne. :eek:

[leightx]

As long as they are peaceful people, who cares what they think? We're going to go around now and make sure everyone thinks exactly the same thing? It was once considered "strange thinking" to say the world was round or that the earth wasn't the center of the universe. "Strange ideas" are often the starting points for new research and new theories. Not saying I agree with them (by any stretch), but really, who cares if they want to believe that the dinosaurs were on the Ark? Some people don't believe in the Ark at all. Some people don't believe that the Bible is true at all. My FIL says it's all a bunch of "fairy tales". Lots of people raise their kids to be atheists. Ultimately, all kids grow up and can decide for themselves what they believe. DH doesn't believe his Dad's theory about the Bible. He did his own research and came to his own conclusions despite what his father says. Those kids will be just fine. Their parents can't shelter them forever. And God gave each of us our own brains. We are not remote controlled forever by our parents. But wait, maybe I'm a strange thinker too since I believe God gave us our brains. Not everyone believes that....

I don't think I ever implied that we should all think the same - in fact, just the opposite. But I'm certainly allowed to have an opinion about what I think is extremely questionable parenting, and to voice that. I'm not saying that everyone needs to parent just like I do (heaven forbid! ;) ).

My biggest problem with raising kids in this manner is that they DON'T think for themselves. That, IMO, is dangerous and wrong.

As for believing that "strange ideas" are behind many scientific discoveries, I won't debate you there. But don't think for a minute that religion has advanced science because of its own "strange ideas". It has been an uphill battle for scientists who dared to question the authority of the church, and religion has more severely hampered scientific knowledge than helped it in any way.

I encourage you to read more about the Full Quivers, and let me know if you still think their views on women and kids are so worthy of our adulation and praise.

Again, they have a right to religious freedom, and to raise their kids however they see fit. I'm not marching over there and taking their kids away, or cramming my own religious veiws down their throat. And I'm not even running for public office like Jim Bob has (both US and state senate). But there is absolutely nothing wrong in voicing the opinion that their religion (and therefore their parenting practices) is not benefiting those kids.

[ErinM]

Jinger???? :eek:

Hee! I though the same thing. This poor child probably sits there and thinks "How did I get stuck with such a crappy name?"

Or something way more Christian like, I guess...:D

[Kathy B]

This poor child probably sits there and thinks "How did I get stuck with such a crappy name?"



It does seem like there were plenty of other J choices, especially since she came along early in the game. How about Jennifer, Julia, Janice or Jill?

[mrswaz]

Wow! Just...wow! Just looking at all those children makes me start sweating! As a SAHM of only two, I just can't imagine...

I've seen the specials on TV and a lot of their lifestyle reminds me of the Amish and Mennonite communities near me. I'm a little surprised that they aren't a farming family. Seems they could trim their grocery bill a lot if they raised their own meat/poultry/eggs and grew their own produce.

I would love to get one of the children alone for a bit to find out how they really feel...

[Gumbeaux]

This familiy reminds me too much of Andrea and Rusty Yates who followed a similar religious doctrine that promoted "having as many kids as nature allows".

Rusty and Andrea Yates decided to have more kids even though Andrea was emotionally unstable and suicidal due to her postpartum depression. :mad:

[ChefBrenda]

Surely I can't be the only one that finds the Duggars disturbing? It's no so much the number of kids, as the way they are parenting (or not parenting) them. :confused:

whats wrong with how they're parenting their kids? none of them are getting in trouble with the law, doing drugs, or causing trouble. they seem like respectible smart kids, and i don't see what the issue is.

[Grace]

Me either. And comparing them to the Yates???? :confused: How on earth does Mrs. Duggar get put in the same category of a VERY mentally unstable woman just because she chooses to have a lot of kids??? :eek: :mad: What they believe religiously has nothing whatsoever to do with her mental condition. If that were true, then you'd have to extrapolate that all muslims must be radical terrorists. :rolleyes: :mad:

These poor people. They believe that children are a gift (they are). They believe that God is in control (He is). They can take care of their children themselves and do not ask society to pay for them. And their children are healthy, smart and upstanding just like ChefBrenda said. Because there are 17 of them means there must be something wrong with them? <shaking head in disbelief> So much for respect and acceptance of people who are different.

As far as having a lot of children being unhealthy? I don't think there's any scientific evidence of that. In fact, they say that having far fewer periods protects women from a lot of female health problems. And even if it was true, not exercising is unhealthy, drinking and smoking are unhealthy, eating junk food is unhealthy, and I could go on and on. Where's all the outrage about that?

[DmOrtega]

...They can take care of their children themselves and do not ask society to pay for them. And their children are healthy, smart and upstanding just like ChefBrenda said. ...


It's truly amazing and admirable that they live a way of life where they are not a burden on society. I wish that was the rule and not the exception. On the other hand if having a dozen or so kids per couple was the rule then over poplulation would be a serious issue. Just because we can doesn't ever mean that we should.

[badunnin]

I wish that was the rule and not the exception. On the other hand if having a dozen or so kids per couple was the rule then over poplulation would be a serious issue.

Yes, but it's not the rule. I mean, if it rained gasoline we would have serious issues as well. But it doesn't. It's a moot point. I highly doubt this family is going to start a trend of families of 15 kids.

[tamawrite]

Me either. And comparing them to the Yates???? :confused: How on earth does Mrs. Duggar get put in the same category of a VERY mentally unstable woman just because she chooses to have a lot of kids??? :eek: :mad: What they believe religiously has nothing whatsoever to do with her mental condition. If that were true, then you'd have to extrapolate that all muslims must be radical terrorists. :rolleyes: :mad:

These poor people. They believe that children are a gift (they are). They believe that God is in control (He is). They can take care of their children themselves and do not ask society to pay for them. And their children are healthy, smart and upstanding just like ChefBrenda said. Because there are 17 of them means there must be something wrong with them? <shaking head in disbelief> So much for respect and acceptance of people who are different.

As far as having a lot of children being unhealthy? I don't think there's any scientific evidence of that. In fact, they say that having far fewer periods protects women from a lot of female health problems. And even if it was true, not exercising is unhealthy, drinking and smoking are unhealthy, eating junk food is unhealthy, and I could go on and on. Where's all the outrage about that?


Ditto what Grace said. :( Let's give these people some credit for raising 17 upstanding citizens. After all, a lot of parents only manage to raise one drug-abusing criminal.

And before I get attacked, let me clarify that no, I don't believe all drug use and criminal activity should be attributed to poor parenting. :rolleyes:

[Kathy B]

While I can't say that I agree with a decision to have as many children as you naturally are able to (not only is there the issue of overpopulation and "what if everybody did?" but I am also still wondering about the impact growing up in such a large family has on the children long term), I do think the family has the right to their choices in how to live and what to teach their kids AS DO WE ALL. We can be outraged or offended or shake our heads or compare them to the Yates family, but it doesn't change anything in the end. I'm glad someone posted the link to their website so I could read more about their frame of reference....not because I agree with it, but because maybe I'll get some insight into how they think and why they believe the way they do.

I would be most interested in hearing how those who did grow up in very large families felt/feel about their childhood looking back on it. There were 6 kids in my family, but I never knew anyone from a family of 10+ kids. Anyone here care to share?

[Becky13347]

Interesting thread....I ditto what Grace said.

As for the large familiy of 10 or more....My dad's sister had 8 children in 11 years, no twins. These cousins of mine are all fun loving, happy people. They've had their ups and downs, some have divorced, some have money, some are making it by the skin of their teeth. It has nothing to do with a large or small family. What I find most astonishing is how they all get along and see each other at least once a year, every year. One top of that, my aunt basically raised them alone, with very little money, her husband leaving often, and finally for good and put herself thru college after the children were born. They do not pretend that life is some 1950s idyllic picture. They are real people. They love one another and respect people for the quality of their character.

I think whether people are happy with their childhoods or not stems less from the number of siblings and more towards parents and how they taught you to love, respect, etc. Just because someone has one or two children does not equal perfect parenting. That's only MHO

[leightx]

These poor people. They believe that children are a gift (they are). They believe that God is in control (He is). They can take care of their children themselves and do not ask society to pay for them. And their children are healthy, smart and upstanding just like ChefBrenda said. Because there are 17 of them means there must be something wrong with them? <shaking head in disbelief> So much for respect and acceptance of people who are different.



Perhaps you're not referring to me, but I'll stress yet again - for the 4th time in this thread - that it's not the large family that bothers me - it's the way they are raising the kids. There are plenty of lesbian or gay couples that raise kids that are healthy, smart, and upstanding, and they sure as heck don't have widespread respect and acceptance from most people in the US. In fact, I'm guessing that you might have a problem with that sort of family in the same way that I have a problem with the Duggars, albeit for very different reasons.

I accept that they have a right to religious freedom, and to have 20 more kids if they so choose, but I don't agree with the way they're raising their kids, nor do I respect what they are doing. I'm not badgering them, or sending them harassing emails, or picketing outside their house. I'm neither outraged nor offended, since what they do doesn't affect me or my family directly. I simply don't agree, and I'm expressing that opinion here. Is that so hard to understand?

[Gumbeaux]

And comparing them to the Yates?????

You got it!

[Kayaksoup]

I accept that they have a right to religious freedom, and to have 20 more kids if they so choose, but I don't agree with the way they're raising their kids, nor do I respect what they are doing. I'm not badgering them, or sending them harassing emails, or picketing outside their house. I'm neither outraged nor offended, since what they do doesn't affect me or my family directly. I simply don't agree, and I'm expressing that opinion here. Is that so hard to understand?

Leigh, I get you. And what is more, I am appalled that people think it is healthy to raise children in such an isolated environment. Obviously, nobody here has come from that sort of upbringing. I was raised in that sort of environment till the age of 11 (except we were allowed to go to church for a while, until church was deemed too corrupted.). I have a younger sister that I just "met" for the first time in 17 years. Guess, what, she was a product of one of these isolated families. She and my brother have zero social skills AND I just found out tonight that my sister ran away from home at the age of 21 with NO concept of what the real world is about and I will have to pay for a plane ticket to extricate her from flipping Mississippi! That is if I can convince her that it is safe to come back to Canada and her parents won't come and take her back home.
I had no social skills or common sense either. More power to them for having all the babies they want, I just hope that their family is not as creepy or unhealthy as they appear.

[Puppylove]

I've seen a couple TLC programs on this family and they seem really happy and loving. The parents appear to have nothing but the best intentions for their kids and it certainly is a lifestyle choice that has far reaching consequences. With a family this size you don't have to intentionally isolate the kids, there simply isn't a way to pay for all of them to have ballet, soccer, singing, and other lessons. Also, kids from large families stick together, even if you take them to church or playgrounds they play with eachother. I do not have a problem with people having as many kids as they want. What I have a problem with, both here and in foreign countries, is people teaching that young women that they are less valuable than men, and that is what teaching the subordination of women does - in Christianity, in Islam, in Judaism and I say this as a Christian woman (whose relationship w/DH is an egalitarian one). I also have a problem with our current secular society teaching women that they are valuable primarliy as sexual objects and that their sexuality is a form of currency. There is a happy medium to be struck and the secular world & Christianity need to stop becoming backlashes to each other.

[Farhana]

I saw the program on this family and also the one where they went to Disneyland.
I found it amazing that all the children seemed to be happy, healthy and well behaved.
I can't imagine how the mom does all these things, homeschooling etc. and each of them can play an instrument...wow. I wonder what they do for entertainment, I don't think they have a tv..... do they? Foodwise, they eat very unhealthy- IMO, all that canned soup and processed stuff:eek:. I don't think it's healthy to separate children from the rest of the world and certainly not good for a woman to give birth so many times but she seems very happy to be able to do it. They must be doing something right otherwise the family wouldn't look so peaceful....... wonder what the secret is:rolleyes:.

[honeygirl1971]

I accept that they have a right to religious freedom, and to have 20 more kids if they so choose, but I don't agree with the way they're raising their kids, nor do I respect what they are doing. I'm not badgering them, or sending them harassing emails, or picketing outside their house. I'm neither outraged nor offended, since what they do doesn't affect me or my family directly. I simply don't agree, and I'm expressing that opinion here. Is that so hard to understand?

Ditto. I support their right to have as many kids as they want and to practice whatever religion they choose, I but do not respect the way they are raising those kids.

[springsgourmet9]

They must be doing something right otherwise the family wouldn't look so peaceful....... wonder what the secret is

I think the secret is they're being filmed for television?

[Grace]

Funny how being filmed for television doesn't help the families on the Super Nanny!

[leightx]

Gumbeaux - yes, same religion, although I must say that I agree with Grace (:eek: ;) ) that we can't paint all members of religion with the same broad brush. And while I vehemently disagree with a religion that teaches grossly inaccurate "facts," subordinates women and kids, and drives many followers to live a life which can not support (because "God will provide"), I can't reasonably conclude that all of their followers are on the brink of going nuts and killing their kids.

Linda - I simply can't imagine. Wow. :( Good luck with your sister and her family.

Puppylove - While I agree that there are definite benefits to having a large family, I don't think isolation is a necessary outcome. I only have 2 kids, and they are involved in different activities where I leave other adults in charge (gasp!). In a family that large, it would be very possible to go to Little League games with 2 or 3 of the kids while the older ones kept the rest at home, or to drop little J____ off at gymnastics or scouts. That's not what's going on though. They are being purposefully sequestered away from thoughts and ideas that might oppose or challenge their little minds. That's not good parenting - it's borderline brainwashing.

I also disagree that it's secular society that is teaching women that they are primarily sex objects - I would say that's pretty much across the board. I'm guessing you'll find porn under the Christians' beds as well. ;)

Farhana - It is no doubt a very loving, family-centered household. I can't argue with that aspect! And I've had several friends go up without TV and do just fine (better than most, in fact)! :)

[Grace]

Perhaps you're not referring to me, but I'll stress yet again - for the 4th time in this thread - that it's not the large family that bothers me - it's the way they are raising the kids. There are plenty of lesbian or gay couples that raise kids that are healthy, smart, and upstanding, and they sure as heck don't have widespread respect and acceptance from most people in the US. In fact, I'm guessing that you might have a problem with that sort of family in the same way that I have a problem with the Duggars, albeit for very different reasons.

I accept that they have a right to religious freedom, and to have 20 more kids if they so choose, but I don't agree with the way they're raising their kids, nor do I respect what they are doing. I'm not badgering them, or sending them harassing emails, or picketing outside their house. I'm neither outraged nor offended, since what they do doesn't affect me or my family directly. I simply don't agree, and I'm expressing that opinion here. Is that so hard to understand?

I get your point, but if you think it's wrong to suggest that gay couples are doing something "wrong" in having/bringing up children (which you implied in your post, but maybe I'm wrong), then why wouldn't it be equally as wrong to think the same of these people?

I think that since none of us really knows them personally, we can't really judge one way or another if the kids are being brought up well or not. And to use their religion or their sexual orientation (or whatever) as the sole basis on which to make such a huge judgement, just isn't fair, IMO. Good children/people come from all religions, all types of families, all cultures. Just because I personally wouldn't choose to raise my family in the muslim/arabic culture (as an example) doesn't mean all those people who do are automatically messed up or harming their children. Saying the same thing about the Duggars based on their religious beliefs is just as wrong. Just MO.

[leightx]

I get your point, but if you think it's wrong to suggest that gay couples are doing something "wrong" in having/bringing up children, then why wouldn't it be equally as wrong to think the same of these people?


I don't think it's wrong to have opinions about people - not at all. How is it avoidable? It's perfectly ok to say that you believe someone is doing things the "wrong way". Where it becomes wrong is to legislate that opinion, which is exactly what the government is doing when it bans gay marriage / adoptions / etc. I also think it's very wrong when your own opinions invade other people's rights.

In addition, I'm NOT guessing at how the Duggars are raising their kids - I've seen it on TV, and filled in the blanks from their website. When you put yourself out there then you can expect to have people form opinions on you. It happens on Super Nanny, it happens on American Idol, and it happens with the Duggars. If they had wanted to show the kids happily going off to Little League or to Girl Scouts they would have. They didn't because that doesn't happen. Their website has been updated in the last year or so, but used to reference the "blanket training" that Christy Marie mentioned in her post.

[Grace]

I also disagree that it's secular society that is teaching women that they are primarily sex objects - I would say that's pretty much across the board. I'm guessing you'll find porn under the Christians' beds as well. ;)


?? This statement has me puzzled. I think it IS secular society that "teaches" women they are primarily sex objects. The word "teaching" (for lack of a better term) being the operative word. I don't see any Christian organizations printing pornographic material, promoting it in church, or putting out sex tapes. Christians happen to live in a secular society (unless they sequester themselves! ;) ), and Christians are not perfect people in any way, shape or form. They are just people like everyone else. Flawed people. People who don't always do the right thing, but who do believe in a God who loves them anyway.

But it is secular society that promotes the idea that pornography is ok, and that pushes that idea through the media (tv shows, magazines, music videos, etc.). Just because Christians have porn under the beds (which I absolutely agree with!!) doesn't mean that it is being "taught" or promoted or main streamed by any main religion, Christian or otherwise.

[Grace]

I don't think it's wrong to have opinions about people - not at all. How is it avoidable? It's perfectly ok to say that you believe someone is doing things the "wrong way". Where it becomes wrong is to legislate that opinion, which is exactly what the government is doing when it bans gay marriage / adoptions / etc. I also think it's very wrong when your own opinions invade other people's rights.

In addition, I'm NOT guessing at how the Duggars are raising their kids - I've seen it on TV, and filled in the blanks from their website. When you put yourself out there then you can expect to have people form opinions on you. It happens on Super Nanny, it happens on American Idol, and it happens with the Duggars. If they had wanted to show the kids happily going off to Little League or to Girl Scouts they would have. They didn't because that doesn't happen. Their website has been updated in the last year or so, but used to reference the "blanket training" that Christy Marie mentioned in her post.

I prefer to judge people on an individual basis, and not make blanket assumptions. And I don't think the only way to be a good, well-rounded individual is to participate in Little League or Girl Scouts. Plenty of kids all around the world do not fit that picture, and they are not all "brainwashed and unhappy".

But we might just have to agree to disagree on that one, and I can live with that! :)

[leightx]

I prefer to judge people on an individual basis, and not make blanket assumptions. And I don't think the only way to be a good, well-rounded individual is to participate in Little League or Girl Scouts. Plenty of kids all around the world do not fit that picture, and they are not all "brainwashed and unhappy".


I'm not judging anyone but this particular family - not sure how that's making a blanket assumption. :confused: I've seen their specials, I've read their website, and I don't like the way they're raising those kids.

I also never said (or even implied) that scouts and little league were a requirement to leading a fulfilling life. In case it's still unclear, I feel like sheltering your kids from outside influence of any sort (scouts, school, church, gymnastics - whatever!) is dangerous and wrong.

[Gumbeaux]

Gumbeaux - yes, same religion, although I must say that I agree with Grace (:eek: ;) ) that we can't paint all members of religion with the same broad brush.

I wasn't painting all religions but simply questioning the "have all the children that you can" doctrine that both the Yates and the Duggars follow. This doctrine is not just for the wealthy and sane but for all followers.

Rusty Yates impregnated his wife after she had two suicide attempts, was hospitalized for mental illness, and still suffered from postpartum depression.

[SugarNSpice]

Duggar's Favorite Family Recipes (http://www.jimbob.info/recipes.html) - A few look promising (oatmeal pancakes), but most look like Sandra Lee recipes.

[badunnin]

A few look promising (oatmeal pancakes), but most look like Sandra Lee recipes.

Which, I have to admit, if I were cooking for 19 on a regular basis, including several small children, I'd probably have to rely on processed foods a bit more than I do now. The family I know with 15 kids was this way - mom didn't have time to cook dinner from scratch every night. Cooking from scratch is a luxury for some.

[hlao23]

Funny how being filmed for television doesn't help the families on the Super Nanny!

It does help the families on Super Nanny....you can't discount the effect of editing on portraying ANYTHING (possibly everything) on television exactly the way producers want it portrayed.

[leightx]

?? I think it IS secular society that "teaches" women they are primarily sex objects. The word "teaching" (for lack of a better term) being the operative word. I don't see any Christian organizations printing pornographic material, promoting it in church, or putting out sex tapes.

I guess it was more the way it was originally presented - as if secular society at large had an agenda to create sex objects out of women, and religions were doing their best to stop it. The rest of the post was framed in an secular vs. Christian way, but maybe I just misunderstood, or am reading too much into Puppylove's post.

Gumbeaux - sorry, I meant to say "We can't paint all the members of a religion with the same brush." Funny how one little letter can make all the difference! :o I also have issues with their doctrine to have all the kids that you have. Mainly it rubs me the wrong way because it's basically saying to put everything in God's hands - God will provide. Is the reverse also true - what do they do about women or men (!!!) who are sterile? Surely they aren't going through extraordinary measures to have kids? But that's probably a topic for another thread... ;)

Hlao - I totally agree. Any show on TV is showing exactly what the producers want you to see. I'm sure the kids on Super Nanny aren't complete brats (or their parents complete idiots) 100% of the time, but it sure looks that way on TV!

I have a feeling that the Duggar kids occasionally get in fights or call each other names, and get frustrated with having that many people in one house, and possibly even talk back to their parents. And honestly, if they don't, I'm even more disturbed.

[GrapeLover]

I just wonder how does her body keep up. I would think she'd be exhausted all the time. It's amazing!!!

[hlao23]

I just wonder how does her body keep up. I would think she'd be exhausted all the time. It's amazing!!!

Well...I'm sure she's got a lot of help. That's one thing that's probably true in families of size...bet mom doesn't do everything so no particularly "spoiled" children.

[SugarNSpice]

Which, I have to admit, if I were cooking for 19 on a regular basis, including several small children, I'd probably have to rely on processed foods a bit more than I do now. The family I know with 15 kids was this way - mom didn't have time to cook dinner from scratch every night. Cooking from scratch is a luxury for some.

I totally understand your thinking and actually on their website it says a typical day involves their 17 yr. old daughter making dinner and another one of the teenage girls making lunch for everyone. Their food is simple for a teenager to make without fear of ruining it and it will feed a crowd, and it will keep tummys full for awhile.

[ClaraB]

I just wonder how does her body keep up. I would think she'd be exhausted all the time. It's amazing!!!
I'm thinking she'll be needing a bladder repair sometime soon :p ...

[Ann1965]

I too saw the special on this family and teased my husband for the longest that I was going to make him "tater tot casserole." Yes, these folks are religious but that's their right. I think that's a better way to be raised than by pot smoking alcoholics living on welfare! Besides, they are self sufficient, not like the McAugheys (sp?) that had the seven babies at one time and received help and donations from everyone, including a house and a van!

[BucknellAlum]

The thing that TICKS ME OFF the most about this situation is their statement that they are letting God determine how many children to have.

Why don't they just say they are not using birth control? That is their right and their decision. I have no problem with someone not using birth control, if both partners agree - it's their business.

But to imply that God is behind their fertility makes me so mad and breaks my heart for all of my friends who have dealt with infertility and/or multiple miscarriages. What, did God just decide that those couples shouldn't have children?? :mad:

I believe God gave us intelligence to decide when and whether to become parents, and how many children we can adequately care for (financially, physically, mentally). That's it. I do not believe He decided that the Duggars deserved 17 kids, but my dear friends deserve none.

Off my rant before I really get started. . .

[ChefBrenda]

The thing that TICKS ME OFF the most about this situation is their statement that they are letting God determine how many children to have.

Why don't they just say they are not using birth control? That is their right and their decision. I have no problem with someone not using birth control, if both partners agree - it's their business.

But to imply that God is behind their fertility makes me so mad and breaks my heart for all of my friends who have dealt with infertility and/or multiple miscarriages. What, did God just decide that those couples shouldn't have children?? :mad:

I believe God gave us intelligence to decide when and whether to become parents, and how many children we can adequately care for (financially, physically, mentally). That's it. I do not believe He decided that the Duggars deserved 17 kids, but my dear friends deserve none.

Off my rant before I really get started. . .


you've got a good point. I believe that having so many children is a direct result of YOUR actions (having sex) and has nothing to do with God "wanting" us to have or not have them.

[AvrilH]

I think it is HYSTERICAL that their website is named JIMBOB.com. If we set up a family website and my dh named it Todd.com I'd start a parralel site called Avril.com. All my pix would be of me and the boys. And my degrees. And my job.

And maybe even a page about how I am going to be soon single. :)

[leightx]

But to imply that God is behind their fertility makes me so mad and breaks my heart for all of my friends who have dealt with infertility and/or multiple miscarriages. What, did God just decide that those couples shouldn't have children?? :mad:



I do believe that is the "official" stance of the Quiver Fulls. In their minds, God is the one who opens and shuts the womb (1 Samuel 1:5-6). I'll go out on a limb and say that the people that lived in Biblical times weren't at all aware of hormones and sperm count and ovulation, and attributed that which they didn't understand to "God's will." Too bad followers of the faith are resigned to scientific knowledge thousands of years old.

[BucknellAlum]

I do believe that is the "official" stance of the Quiver Fulls. In their minds, God is the one who opens and shuts the womb (1 Samuel 1:5-6). I'll go out on a limb and say that the people that lived in Biblical times weren't at all aware of hormones and sperm count and ovulation, and attributed that which they didn't understand to "God's will." Too bad followers of the faith are resigned to scientific knowledge thousands of years old.

Wow, I just read some of the Quiver Full website and it is jaw-dropping IMHO.

I hope none of my infertile friends ever read it. And I would love to have a chat with some of the (male) essay writers there who decry birth control. I'd char about what it feels like to have major post-partum issues. And whether it would be a healthy thing to bring yet more children into a fragile mother's life, at a time when she can barely care for herself and her current children.

You're right, it's a shame that they are ignoring this whole area of science. I am sure they will not hesitate to use modern medical science if one of their children develops an infection or cancer. They'll just be selective when it comes to ob-gyn science.

[cookinprogress]

Certainly wouldn't be how I'd want to live, but I have always believed that people should be allowed to live by their own beliefs, and not be forced to live by anyone else's. Hence the reason I've never understood the opposition to gay marriage etc., but I won't get started on all of that. :p

I just wonder how this couple find so much time to be um.. intimate. Considering there is only a narrow time frame of fertility each month, I'm thinking they must somehow be finding quite a bit of time in order for her to get pregnant so often assuming she isn't intentionally trying to get pregnant, which it didn't sound like she was.

[leightx]

Cookinprogress - couldn't agree more! I'm definitely of the "live and let live" mindset, even though I strongly disagree with their parenting practices.

Also - I think some people are just incredibly fertile. In fact, I think I'm one of them. :o Both of my kids were happy accidents, conceived on birth control. I was pregnant with DS only 4 months after I had DD - and that's while I was breastfeeding and on the mini-pill (and believe me - there wasn't much time to be intimate!). It's my understanding that Michelle weans her infants at 5 months to conceive the next baby.

[ClaraB]

It's my understanding that Michelle weans her infants at 5 months to conceive the next baby.If she trusts in God's will, why does she wean her babies to have more? Sounds like she's taking matters into her own hands, instead of leaving it in God's.

[BucknellAlum]

Cookinprogress - couldn't agree more! I'm definitely of the "live and let live" mindset, even though I strongly disagree with their parenting practices.



I agree with you and Cokkinprogress! I definitely respect the right of people to practice their own religion, raise their children a certain way (assuming there is no harm to the kids).

But, I do not feel this "movement" respects MY choices. Their website is full of insinuations about people who use birth control being sinners against God, or subjecting themselves to all sorts of "medical" problems (most of which are not supported by modern medical science).

They do not appear to have the "live and let live" philosophy, and I resent the fact that they say things like childlessness is a punishment of God's and so forth.

I would not be happy if, on the playground, one of their kids started telling my kids that their parents are "sinners" for practicing birth control. However, since they isolate their kids and homeschool, I need not worry about that. :D