16 kids and wanting more!!!

[popcornbird]

Did you all read this story on CNN? WOW!!! This family is HUGE!!!!!! Amazing story. I was watching a video interview with the whole family, and the kids all seem to be so well behaved. How could anyone raise and control 16 kids like that? They homeschool them all too!!!! :eek: Wow! I keep thinking, "16 kids!!!" and going, "OUCH :o!!!" LOL! Good that they're happy. I personally wouldn't want to THINK of having half that many kids. Ouch ouch...childbirth 16 times? OUCH! They seem to be such a lovely, devoted family though.


http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/parenting/10/12/sixteen.kids.ap/index.html



Mom delivers 16th child, thinking of more

LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AP) -- Michelle Duggar just delivered her 16th child, and she's already thinking about doing it again.

Johannah Faith Duggar was born at 6:30 a.m. Tuesday and weighed 7 pounds, 6.5 ounces.

The baby's father, Jim Bob Duggar, a former state representative, said Wednesday that mother and child were doing well. Johannah's birth was especially exciting because it was the first time in eight years the family has had a girl, he said.

Jim Bob Duggar, 40, said he and Michelle, 39, want more children.

"We both just love children and we consider each a blessing from the Lord. I have asked Michelle if she wants more and she said yes, if the Lord wants to give us some she will accept them," he said in a telephone interview.

The Discovery Health Channel filmed Johannah's birth and plans to air a show about the family in May.

The Learning Channel is doing another show about the family's construction project, a 7,000-square foot house that should be finished before Christmas. The home, which the family from the northwest Arkansas town of Rogers has been building for two years, will have nine bathrooms, dormitory-style bedrooms for the girls and boys, a commercial kitchen, four washing machines and four dryers.

Jim Bob Duggar, who sells real estate, previously lost his bid for the U.S. Senate. He said he expects to run for the state Senate next year but isn't ready to make a formal announcement.

Michelle Duggar, 39, had her first child at age 21, four years after the couple married.

Their children include two sets of twins, and each child has a name beginning with the letter "J": Joshua, 17; John David, 15; Janna, 15; Jill, 14; Jessa, 12; Jinger, 11; Joseph, 10; Josiah, 9; Joy-Anna, 8; Jeremiah, 6; Jedidiah, 6; Jason, 5; James, 4; Justin, 2; Jackson Levi, 1; and now Johannah.

[Logan]

I saw part of their interview on the Today Show this morning. WOW!!!!!! :eek: Good for them......not good for me!! :)

[ramanth]

I get everyones names mixed up. :rolleyes: :o :D

Good for them, but I'd never do that.

[PJ's Mom]

I've seen them before. I wonder if they just keep having kids for the attention. :D

I have a hard time with my 4 and they're almost grown. ;)

[Almita]

I know I saw that yesterday and I'm thinking she is wanting more jst for the attention! I can't believe she named them all starting with a J!

[Flatcoatluver]

I just read that!! Omg couldn't stand living in that home! I love being where i am a only child with a brother moved out!

[jackie]

I wonder what religious denomination they are?

[gemini9961]

I have seen them on TV before and I would never ever ever have that many kids. Too expensive to say the least. Yikes, just because you can get pregnant and keep having them doesn't mean you should. I can't imagine all the kids get the attention they all need. Buy hey, to each his own and whatever floats their boat.

[Flatcoatluver]

weird yeah my aunt is really messed up in the head anyway, they have 7 and what we think is she loved kids when they were babies and then when they grew out of it she had babies again anyway the dr. told her to stop having babies because it wasn't you know good.

[finn's mom]

I'd heard about that, crazy. But, if it works, good for them. As long as they're all happy and healthy, I have no qualms about it. My friend's brother's wife just miscarried what would have been their seventh child. She's 32, and, he's about ten or eleven years older. Their kids are all smart and sweet and well behaved. They live almost entirely from the earth, no tv, they are home schooled, etc. It's not for me, I know that much, but, they are happy. They're not hurting anyone, ya know? I personally think two is my max. :) And, I haven't even had one, yet, so, who knows?!

[crsvstang]

Wow! I couldn't even imagine even having close to that many kids. But if they are all happy & healthy then more power to them.

I have hard enough time with my 2. I don't think I could handle anymore.

I know of one other lady on a parenting board I visit. She has I think 14 kids and excepting another.

[petslover]

Yes, I seen that too. I have seen them a few years ago when they had a few less and I thought that was alot. I think its great for them to do that. It looks like the kids are healthy and very well behaved. I, personally, couldn't stand a chance at having 16 kids lol...

[PJ's Mom]

I wonder what religious denomination they are?

I think they're either Mormon or Jehovah's Witness. I could be wrong (as usual) but I remember hearing something about it awhile back.

[ILoveReptiles]

I for one think it's absolutely and positively disgusting.

And my tax dollars will wind up paying for her sorry butt. I just want to slap the woman.

Grrr. :mad: Forced sterilization is sounding mighty good about now.

[carole]

I don't have as strong opposed views as the last poster, but way too many kids IMO, but each to their own, who are we to say how many kids they can have, if they are well-adjusted, well taken care of, then I guess it is their business.,if they do indeed rely on welfare of any kind, then maybe it is in the public interest, and to have a say.

I just cannot imagine having that many children, you cannot tell me they all get their special individual time, I mean where does one get that amount of time to spend with them, they do miss out IMO, either emotionally or financially, with that many kids you cannot possibly give them everything, and I do not mean material things, but opportunity's etc.

[Flatcoatluver]

i wonder if they can remember all their names???

[dukedogsmom]

I think iit's ridiculous. But hey, if she wants to basically be a breeder mare, whatever. As someone else stated, just because you can get pregnant, doesn't mean you should keep having them year after year after year. I just don't get why people get all thrilled about it. I also think they do it for the attention. Ever heard of birth control?

[ILoveReptiles]

That, or the money.

Welfare moms really get me mad.

When someone has THAT many children, it's fairly obvious to me that they don't consider them even human - just objects. Tools to get them more money from the welfare system. Trophies if you will. I've seen it all before, and it sickens me.

[Logan]

I for one think it's absolutely and positively disgusting.

And my tax dollars will wind up paying for her sorry butt. I just want to slap the woman.

Grrr. :mad: Forced sterilization is sounding mighty good about now.

I think that is WAY out of line. :(

[ILoveReptiles]

I think it's way out of line for her to be having that many children, so, we're even. There's no way she can afford them all - she's got to be getting handouts, which means my taxes are paying for it on some level

[finn's mom]

A lot of people don't use birth control for religious reasons. They feel that if God is giving them the pregnancies, they're going to have the children. Some feel as though it's interfering with God and nature to use birth control. I've been on birth control for 13 years, I obviously don't feel that way. ;) But, I know several people that do. As long as these kids are all well taken care of, I don't see how it is harmful. The kids and adults I've known that come from large families (and, I'm talking LARGE, like 6 kids or more), have been exceptional people and none of them felt like they missed out on any more than a child from a small family might. All situations have their good and bad points. If this family is just abusing the system and is on welfare, I can see the issue, but, if not, I don't understand what the problem is. If anyone wants to give me more details on why it would be, I'm all ears.

[jackie]

When someone has THAT many children, it's fairly obvious to me that they don't consider them even human - just objects. Tools to get them more money from the welfare system. Trophies if you will. I've seen it all before, and it sickens me.

Whoa, CALM DOWN! I didn't see it posted once that they are relying on wefare. I agree with Logan, you are out of line. I am sure that some people have that many kids to abuse the system, but not all. My mother has 6 sisters and a brother. My great uncle had 13 kids. I come from a family of BIG families, and not one of them use their children to abuse welfare.

I don't agree with having that many kids, simply because the earth already has a huge population. But that is MY view, I don't think everyone should share that view.


*edited for a spelling mistake. :o

[finn's mom]

I think it's way out of line for her to be having that many children, so, we're even. There's no way she can afford them all - she's got to be getting handouts, which means my taxes are paying for it on some level

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, but, that's not necessarily true. We don't know their financial situation, or maybe it stated it in an article that I missed. There are a lot of unknowns in the situation, and, it just seems a bit harsh and hateful to just assume they're mooching off the government and our tax dollars.

[Karen]

I think it's way out of line for her to be having that many children, so, we're even. There's no way she can afford them all - she's got to be getting handouts, which means my taxes are paying for it on some level


A. This is Pet Talk, be polite.

B. You do not know the family's financial situation, so have no cause to assume you are paying for any of her children's care. And if you are solely basing it that way, just think - all of those kids will be working adults some day, and contributing their tax dollars and maybe social security contributions to pay for your retirement! It cuts both ways.

I am moving this thread to the Dog House.

[finn's mom]

When someone has THAT many children, it's fairly obvious to me that they don't consider them even human - just objects.


My gosh, that's incredibly hateful. I can understand being mad at welfare moms, I've known a few, and, they anger me, too. But, do we know that these people are on welfare? Do we even know their financial situation? I don't know, I can totally see not agreeing with having that many kids, but, why so much hatred towards a family you know nothing about? i'm not trying to be nosy or rude, I'm just shocked at how personally you seem to be taking it. Maybe I'm totally reading your responses incorrectly, I don't know. :(

[finn's mom]

I am moving this thread to the Dog House.

That's sad that you have to do that, but, I agree it's gotten to that point. That stinks.

[ILoveReptiles]

Sorry to let you in on this, but by the time I'm retired, Social Security won't exist anymore.

I think it's totally irresponsible, and it should NOT be encouraged in any way shape or form.

I won't back down on my opinion either. You're all entitled to yours, by all means. This sort of thing just REALLY gets me angry.

[PJ's Mom]

Last I heard they were not living on welfare at all. In fact, they don't even use credit. If they can't pay cash, they don't buy it.

I don't know if they're still that way, but a few months ago I watched a special on TLC about them, and that's how they ran their lives.

Pretty good, if you ask me. ;)

[jackie]

Sorry to let you in on this, but by the time I'm retired, Social Security won't exist anymore.

I think it's totally irresponsible, and it should NOT be encouraged in any way shape or form.

I won't back down on my opinion either. You're all entitled to yours, by all means. This sort of thing just REALLY gets me angry.

That is your opinion, and thats great, but you can express it in a normal way. There is no reason to be a raging fanatic about it.

[Karen]

When someone has THAT many children, it's fairly obvious to me that they don't consider them even human - just objects. Tools to get them more money from the welfare system. Trophies if you will. I've seen it all before, and it sickens me.

Wait - does that mean you don't think people with a lot of pets consider each one as special and worthy either?

Most teachers have to contend with more than 16 students every day, all at once, yet we entrust to them the care of future generations ...

Large families were more common in prior generations, my grandmother was second-eldest in a family of eight children. Each of the eldest (the first four were girls) was kind of assigned a younger sibling to care for - my grandmother's "responsibility" was the youngest girl, Bertha. Mind you, Bertha said she usually was called "Edith-Ethel-Elizabeth-Florence-BERTHA!" but she knew her name anyway. When my grandmother died (when I was an infant), Bertha and my mother became closer friends, so the "connection" kind of continues to this day.

[finn's mom]

Sorry to let you in on this, but by the time I'm retired, Social Security won't exist anymore.

I think it's totally irresponsible, and it should NOT be encouraged in any way shape or form.

I won't back down on my opinion either. You're all entitled to yours, by all means. This sort of thing just REALLY gets me angry.

I'm not saying you should back down on your opinion. At all. I respect that you think she's had too many kids. But, it's the way you were saying you didn't like it because she was abusing welfare, and, there's nothing saying that she is. And, there's a difference in being angry and speaking calmly and being angry and nasty. I can't speak for anyone else, but, I was just confused at why you were being so nasty in expressing your opinion. Again, I respect your opinion, completely. I wouldn't want you to back down. But, if it's welfare moms that piss you off, that doesn't appear to be the case here.

[caseysmom]

It is very presumptive to assume something about a family or a person when you know only a small part of the story.

[petslover]

I don't think anyone should be so harsh to a family that they don't even really know. I understand opinions, but plain out mean is another thing.

They have the right to have 16 kids. God Blessed them with all these kids and they seem to be doing a good job at raising these kids.

I have never heard that they were on any government program either. Maybe they come from wealthy familys, and are settled money wise.

Each domination has their own system of beliefs. So I respect theirs.

Just my opinion.

[Karen]

Sorry to let you in on this, but by the time I'm retired, Social Security won't exist anymore.

I think it's totally irresponsible, and it should NOT be encouraged in any way shape or form.

I won't back down on my opinion either. You're all entitled to yours, by all means. This sort of thing just REALLY gets me angry.

It may not exist by the time I retire either, but in any case, they will be taxpeyrs when you are ready to retire, and so will be supporting the government that will, in all likelihood, be contributing some to your well-being, whether or not it is called Social Security at that time. Civilzation my well fall completely apart, sure, but I'm betting against that happening.

Anger can be always expressed, as well as any differences of opinion, in a civil manner. Civlity is generally prefered here on Pet Talk.

[popcornbird]

Good gosh...some of you are WAY out of line. :eek: While I personally wouldn't ever want to have that many children...if that's what the family LIKES, who are we to say they're wrong? I don't believe a single penny from our tax money goes to them anyway. They are building a 7,000 sq ft house...obviously have the money to do so. All of the children looked well behaved, well dressed, and obviously, well taken care of. I wouldn't ever want that many kids. I do know that in certain cases, lots of siblings are a blessing. My dad comes from a family of 8, and my mom, 7. That was pretty normal 40-50 years ago...a lot of people had that many kids. Its not that common NOW...and of course 7-8 doesn't compare with 16, but still. Its not for me, but if they're happy and taking their responsibility seriously, then that's good for them. Who are we to judge their decision and think badly of them because of it?? Sure they might be different...and we might think its crazy...BUT, if they're happy with it and caring for all of those children, then that's good for them, and we have no right to condemn them for it. Its very possible that they are raising good, level-headed children, and that each and every one of those children will be a huge contribution to our society when they grow up. Who are we to judge??? Sheesh...calm down.

[ILoveReptiles]

That, and the fact that the earth is already so overpopulated - going on 7 billion people... there really isn't any reason these days to have that many kids. IMHO, back in the colonial ages, it was necessary to have big families like this so that they'd have extra help working the farm.

I feel our society has advanced beyond that point - it's just not necessary, and it strikes me as so horribly wasteful, I can't help but get angry. We're supposed to be preserving this planet - not destroying it.

So yes, call me a fanatic if you will. I don't really care - I feel the way I feel.

[finn's mom]

That, and the fact that the earth is already so overpopulated - going on 7 billion people... there really isn't any reason these days to have that many kids. IMHO, back in the colonial ages, it was necessary to have big families like this so that they'd have extra help working the farm.

I feel our society has advanced beyond that point - it's just not necessary, and it strikes me as so horribly wasteful, I can't help but get angry. We're supposed to be preserving this planet - not destroying it.

So yes, call me a fanatic if you will. I don't really care - I feel the way I feel.

So, it's not the welfare thing that bothers you with this family, then? It's the overpopulation that's the biggest issue for you? I'm just trying to understand your point of view. And, again, I totally respect your opinion, it just might be taken more to heart and maybe even accepted by someone else who previously thought differently...if you had expressed it with a little less animosity. I think that's more the issue than your opinion itself.

[Edwina's Secretary]

I haved to ask the question...WHY???? Large families were an economic necessity when infant mortality was high. Children were needed to work the farm/support the parents in old age.

How does a mother home school 16? Yes...teachers have classes larger than that...all the same age and none infants. Older ones teaching younger ones? Okay...but what do they get out of it?

[popcornbird]

ILoveReptiles, it is not your family. They are not related to you. They are not your friends. More than likely, they are people you will never meet or see in your life. If it wasn't for the media, you wouldn't even know. WHY do you care??? Quite frankly, it is none of your business. It is none of any of our business. The reason I posted it was because I was thinking, "Wow...what a huge, huge family." It wasn't to put them down, or to have anyone look at them with disgust. I would much rather see such families than the many broken families that we have in society these days. So many children are neglected growing up...parents get divorced...they live tough lives. I would much rather see children growing up in big families that grow up with respect for others, than to see children that come from broken families with a lack of love growing up...kids that turn out to be teenage monsters, and a destruction for society. These kids' parents are working together to raise them sincerely. WHY should it matter to ANYONE? Its none of our business. It really isn't. If they are parenting properly, it is absolutely NONE of anyone's business. Its not something I would EVER do...but if they're happy with it...again...none of my business.

[jackie]

And, again, I totally respect your opinion, it just might be taken more to heart and maybe even accepted by someone else who previously thought differently...if you had expressed it with a little less animosity. I think that's more the issue than your opinion itself.

Well said!

[ILoveReptiles]

So, it's not the welfare thing that bothers you with this family, then? It's the overpopulation that's the biggest issue for you? I'm just trying to understand your point of view. And, again, I totally respect your opinion, it just might be taken more to heart and maybe even accepted by someone else who previously thought differently...if you had expressed it with a little less animosity. I think that's more the issue than your opinion itself.

Actually, it's both.

I admit I was a bit rude, but this just hit a nerve. It's something I'm very passionate about.

I apologize for offending anyone.

[finn's mom]

I haved to ask the question...WHY???? Large families were an economic necessity when infant mortality was high. Children were needed to work the farm/support the parents in old age.

How does a mother home school 16? Yes...teachers have classes larger than that...all the same age and none infants. Older ones teaching younger ones? Okay...but what do they get out of it?


As for why, I know the families I've had experience with have said it's because they don't agree with birth control, and, if God is allowing them to have children, they will continue to do so. My friend's brother has six kids, and, they're going to have more. She just miscarried what would have been their seventh, and, their reason for having so many is because that's what they feel like is the right thing to do. And, I guess a mom homeschooling different ages wouldn't be a lot different than WAY back in the day when all grades met in the one room school house. I don't know, I personally wouldn't do it, but, it's done, and, just as some publicly schooled children excel and others fail, I imagine the rate of success is just as diverse in home school. I don't know the statistics, but, I've seen it work for some kids and not for others. And, for what they get out of it, again...I think the answer to that is so personal and probably different even for each of their kids. I don't think a question like that can really be answered here.

[finn's mom]

Actually, it's both.

I admit I was a bit rude, but this just hit a nerve. It's something I'm very passionate about.

I apologize for offending anyone.

Cool. I mostly had an issue with you assuming they were on welfare. ;) We just don't know. It doesn't seem like they have money woes, but, that's just a guess. Apology accepted. I wasn't so much offended, though, as I was just like...whoa.

[caseysmom]

I think in our society there are many women now that have no desire to have children (the smart ones anyway :D ) anyhow I think it balances out the families that are large. I certainly would not want it to be dicated to me how many children I can have.

[finn's mom]

I think in our society there are many women now that have no desire to have children (the smart ones anyway :D ) anyhow I think it balances out the families that are large.


I was kinda thinking that, too, but, couldn't think of how to word it. I don't know how much it balances out really, but, I would think there are plenty of people that don't have children to at least counter the ones that have many to some extent. Especially nowadays, it's just not necessarily in people's plans all the time like it used to be, having children.

[Logan]

If you watch the video, completely, on CNN, you certainly can't walk away thinking that these folks are on any kind of welfare at all!!! They are building a 7000 sq ft house. Welfare does NOT afford this kind of thing and I happen to believe that they are doing something that the rest of us could learn from about budgeting, putting responsibility on our kids, etc. Although I could not function as a homeschooler to one, let alone 16, I think these folks definitely have "got it together" as a family unit. I don't think one dime of my tax money is going to support them after reading what I have, for sure.

Logan

[Karen]

Actually, it's both.

I admit I was a bit rude, but this just hit a nerve. It's something I'm very passionate about.

I apologize for offending anyone.



It's okay, apology accepted. Just remember next time that it is better to express yourself calmly and civilly when posting on Pet Talk.

[jackie]

I think in our society there are many women now that have no desire to have children (the smart ones anyway ) anyhow I think it balances out the families that are large.

Most people rarely seem to have more then two children anyways, and those two will fill your, and your partners place in the population when you die.

[Logan]

Whew! I'm so slow in my response that I was in General and my post ended up in the Dog House!!!! :o I watched the CNN video, twice, to make sure I was making a proper point.

I know that having 3 kids is expensive. Would LOVE to know what this man does for a living to afford 16! They're doing something right, for sure. One thing I remember from the Today Show this morning is that their grocery bill is in excess of $2000 per month! :eek:

This post should not be hostile. It is one family's choice, their decision, and it's making the news because it is interesting news. I like it when special interest news stories like this one hit the airwaves to balance all the other negative stuff that we endure when we watch the news.

I am a Fox News person and watch Fox and Friends in the morning, when I'm getting ready for work. E. D. Hill has 8 kids......is she wrong? I don't think so. I wouldn't want to walk in her shoes, but good for her!

I feel the same way about the Duggan family. Good for them! Those children will grow up to be responsible, good adults if what we're hearing is correct.

Logan (who thinks she is "done" with this discussion)

[Edwina's Secretary]

I do quibble with the "we don't pay for them." We do. Higher medical insurance premiums....they pay the same family rate as a family with one child - just for an example. "No man is an island" and we support each other...through taxes, insurance, etc in many, many ways!

That said...it is their business. I just feel sorry for the children and cannot find it admirable.

[DJFyrewolf36]

It mentioned something in the article about the father being in Real Estate so I doubt money is an issue.

I can't judge or say if the kids are happy or not. It seems like it from thier photos though.

Has any of the programs about them interviewed the older kids? I wonder what they have to say.

I wouldn't want 16 kids, but if they are all happy, well adjusted and well cared for I can't see why people need to judge them.

[lizbud]

I wonder how much money it would cost to send 16 children to college?

[DJFyrewolf36]

For the 2004/2005 academic year, the average annual cost of a four-year public college is $14,640 and the average annual cost of a four-year private college is $30,295. (Source: The College Board's Trends in College Pricing Report 2004.) The total figures include five expense items: tuition and fees, room and board, books and supplies, transportation, and personal expenses



Well, using those numbers as an average, not counting for inflation...

Public College: $234,320
Private College: $484,720

Thats quite a bit of money!

[Scooby4]

The couple with 16 kids are NOT on welfare. Although some tax dollars may have went towards them considering that the guy was a Senator Representative in his state. :eek: He's going to run again this year after losing last years election. So is it better to have paid the guy's salary with our tax dollars to represent the people of his state instead of supporting him with the welfare dollars of the state? :cool: :rolleyes:
Remember that 2 of them are sets of twins. One fraternal and one identical. That accounts for 4 of the children there alone. The couple also did not start having children until 4 years into their marriage! :eek: Then they had children about every 2 years between. The usual number people suggest separating children's births.
They have been working on building their 7000 square foot home for 2 years now. The bedrooms are going to be "dormitory" style. So the bedrooms are going to be shared. None of the children are "special needs" and are all healthy. Their living conditions and education is better than what most children receive. They are learning to work together and take care of one another which is what any body could ask of their children. ;)
I personally wouldn't want that many kids but I don't say that someone shouldn't. This isn't a case of having children for the sake of having children or getting a bigger welfare check. This is a situation where there is a loving home environment and each birth is treated like a miracle and blessing. I am almost jealous. ;)
Besides the woman who had the most children had 53 children!!! She lives in South America and is soo dazed that she no longer recognizes most of the kids! She's had several sets of twins and triplets which accounts for the large number. I think she's only given birth 25 times in all. :eek: So 16 isn't so bad after all!!! :cool:

[dukedogsmom]

If they were pet owners, wonder if they would be considered hoarders?

[lizbud]

If they were pet owners, wonder if they would be considered hoarders?


LOL :D Good question Valerie..... :D

[Logan]

I wonder how much money it would cost to send 16 children to college?

A LOT! For sure, Liz, but as many financial consultants will tell you these days, we need to put more responsibility on the child to earn their college education rather than providing it anyway.......I think there is a happy medium in there, somewhere. Just my 2 cents.

[Vette]

I dont think ill have one kid.. let alone 16 of them.
as if the world isnt over populated enough as it is. ;)

[jennifert9]

WOW!! 16 kids!! I cannot even imagine!!

MHO, I think giving birth to 16 children is a bit over the top...we do have an overpopulation problem in this world. I do agree that it is their business and take no issue with them doing what they want with their lives. And I understand the birth control issue that Finn's Mom brought up also. I don't know the solution...except stop having sex and start adopting! :D:D;)
There are thousands,if not millions of children that need homes. I honestly haven't heard much about this family,just what I saw on TV tonight and what I have read here BUT I did hear the father say that they love children and love raising them. They can do that by adopting as well as they can by reproducing....sometines I think the "self-reproduction" thing is overrated and self-centered...the world doesn't necessarily need another "me" or even another person with my "bloodlines." The world needs to care for the children that need homes and love and TLC and raise them as good, kind, caring, productive members of society. I'm not all that wonderful that I think there needs to be another one of "me" living 200 years from now!! LOL!! ;)
However, that adoption issue brings back up the birth control issue and if they are against it then I don't know....? I read an article in Reader's Digest a month or 2 ago about a family that had 25 children, 3 natural and 22 adopted. All the adopted children had some form of disability, most had Down's symdrome and some had cerebal palsy and a few others had some other form of disability. (I can't remember exactly) So that family is raising even MORE children than this family is, the difference being that most of theirs were adopted. I guess if this family had stopped after 3 there would be room in their home and hearts for 13 needy children...That is just how I see it. I am a huge advocate of adoption in both pets and humans. However, I am also a woman of child-bearing age who does not have any children of her own so, in a way, I am speaking out of turn as I am not in their, or any parent's shoes.

Re: college education costs...I think that the ~$30,000 cost was a PER YEAR cost, not a 4 year cost. So that's $120,000 per child x 16. (I can't even attempt to to the math!! ;))
Simply mind-boggling!! And Logan, I agree with you to some extent that it is a good idea to have the child contribute to their own college education and that it is in no way entirely the parent's responsibility. Unfortunately, it doesn't always work out the way it was intended, to teach responsibility and the value of money and education to your children. I paid for most of my own bachelor's degree, my parents paid what they could and sent me spending money ($20/month 10 yrs ago that was a GOLD MINE!!! :D) I also worked on campus while I was in college. I still left school with over $30,000 in student loans which is relatively mild compared to today's figures or what people with advanced degrees are paying but keep in mind,I went to a NY state school, not a private school. My first student loan payment 9 months after I graduated, was more than my paycheck for the entire month of work at my first job!!!!!!!!!! And I had a fairly decent job, comparable with other college grads at the time! I had to get my payments reduced time and time again until my pay caught up with the monthly payment they were expecting from me. Even now, I will easily be paying them for another 20 years. AND, because of those student loans, I lived with my parents until I was 27 years old because I could barely afford the 6 yr old used car I bought to get to work much less my own place to live!! Compared to my best friend whose parents were able to afford to pay 100% of her private school education as well as give her a used car when she graduated. She was living on her own at 22 and just built her own home whereas I hae little to no savings and am still renting. (I love her to death and maybe jealous but I am not bitter, I ADORE my parents and wouldn't change a thing, I'm just making a point.) I guess the parents will still get the "costs" of the education, either on the front or the back side...(That sounds funny!!:D) But you get my point I think...so I will shut up now... :)

[QueenScoopalot]

When I was growing up in the 60s and 70s, there were two competing families both with the last name "Mahony/Mahoney". Both lived within 3 blocks of each other, and when I left home at 16, one family had 17 kids, and the other family was 'baking' an 18th! :eek:I cannot fathom the chaos all those kids could create, but always found it quite amusing. As long as a family can financially support and educate their kids, and teach them all to be respectable members of society, I don't personally have a problem with that. It's ones that spew out dispicable brats that they think are perfect, and rely on taxpayers $$$ to support them....that gets me. :rolleyes: They're the reason our jails are filled to capacity, and then some. :rolleyes: It all boils down to personal choice, and I am happy to be mother to many! Animals :D

[carole]

I think QSA summed it up nicely, it is about personal choice, and yes if they are well cared for and not on welfare, what the heck has it to do with anyone, we are all entitled to our opinions, there are people out there who would consider it ludicrous to own a large group of pets like some of our wonderful Pters do, but as long as the owner takes good care of them it is none of our business.

I know there are welfare mothers out there and here using the system, but I get a little peeved at all the animosity towards solo parents out there,for those who sit comfortably in their two parent families feeling superior, there is no guarantee your marriage will stay together forever , that your partner won't do a runner and you could all of a sudden find yourself in a position to rely on welfare until you get on your feet again, one should not judge so harshly until you have walked in those shoes.

My only concern was just how much individual attention these kids get, It is hard enough when you have two dividing your time between them, your husband, pets, parents whatever, however from what everyone has said they are well-adjusted young people, who knows they may actually be better off than coming from a small family.

I certainly would hate to have a family that large, but if they are happy in doing so, then it is fine with me.

[K9karen]

At least they're not abusing the system. But she's probably abusing hers. She won't be so thankful when her insides fall out. But, hey! If they're capable of keeping their life in control, in all aspects, Bless them!

[jackie]

There are thousands,if not millions of children that need homes. I honestly haven't heard much about this family,just what I saw on TV tonight and what I have read here BUT I did hear the father say that they love children and love raising them. They can do that by adopting as well as they can by reproducing....sometines I think the "self-reproduction" thing is overrated and self-centered...the world doesn't necessarily need another "me" or even another person with my "bloodlines." The world needs to care for the children that need homes and love and TLC and raise them as good, kind, caring, productive members of society. I'm not all that wonderful that I think there needs to be another one of "me" living 200 years from now!! LOL!!

Adoption is a truely wonderful thing, but its not for all people. I don't think you can compare the adoption of pets, to the adoption of people. They are on two hugely different levels. Reproduction is not overrated or self-centered, its basic instinct. :p

[lizbud]

At least they're not abusing the system. But she's probably abusing hers. She won't be so thankful when her insides fall out.


Karen, I had that same thought but didn't know how to put it. :D Oh my,
I'd like to see her interviewed at say, age 50. :D

[lizbud]

A LOT! For sure, Liz, but as many financial consultants will tell you these days, we need to put more responsibility on the child to earn their college education rather than providing it anyway.......I think there is a happy medium in there, somewhere. Just my 2 cents.

I'm sure there is a happy medium somewhere Logan. :) Maybe I'm old school,
but I've always thought parents should be thinking & saving for college when
the children are still in diapers.I've always been willing to help with at least the first year or two. Those first years are sometimes the hardest for young
people to adjust to new places, setting good study habits, etc.

[catnapper]

Wow, has this thread progressed! LOL

Ok, from the way I see things (in my own weird little way) I think that in all likelihood, thoe kids are getting as much, if not MORE attention than the average Amrican kid nowadays. From the religious folks in my area, I know of a few with 10,11, 12 kids. They all are GREAT kids. Honest, polite, helpful. The family means a lot to them, and they rely heavily on each other. Opposed to the typical American family with our 2 children, these families with 12 kids get by remarkably well. They rely on dad as the primary money maker, with mom taking in sewing, making crafts, babysitting, etc to bring in additional income. You'd be amazed at how finaincially stable they are. One family I know of through my FIL currently has 4 kids in college, 6 in private school (Mennonite day school... not some fancy private boarding school or anything! :p) and they pay CASH for everything. No student loans for the kids at all. Dad owns a small store, mom stays at home and makes jellies to sell at craft shows and such.

Thee religious families with a dozen kids are also are odd... in that they SPEND TIME TOGETHER! No cell phones, no computer games, head buried under a Walkman, no ten hour tv marathons. Mom and dad are there when you need them - instead of half listening instead of dividing their attention between cooking dinner, the scintilating soap opera, and the laundry. Mom has HELP folding the laundry, HELP peeling the carrots for dinner. OMG.... ask any of my kids or their friend to make dinner, you might get them to open a can of corn. Its a completely diffrent mind set and lifestyle. Their priorities are a bit different than you or I. Family is top priority. Everything else is non-existant to them.

Sometimes I think we could all take a lesson from them -- in how they relate to each other and separate the outside "noise" from their lives. We all list things as what we "need" - new computer, an ipod, a new couch. They list NECESSITIES... shoes, pants, coat, food. They get the couch when it falls apart and there's a NEED for it. Until then, they happily exist thanking God they even HAVE whatever it is they have.

All that said, I myself can't see having 16 children. My three are plenty, thank you ;)

[finn's mom]

Ok, from the way I see things (in my own weird little way) I think that in all likelihood, thoe kids are getting as much, if not MORE attention than the average Amrican kid nowadays.


That's what I was thinking, too. Every large family I've ever known has spent more time together as an entire family than the families with two kids. The kids help with everything, and, do it willingly. They help with the younger kids, they help with the chores, all of it. And, what you were saying about not having their faces buried in walkmans or tvs or computers, too...I was thinking that, too. My friend's brother's family is like that, they don't even have a television. They make most of their toys. Brian's brother makes almost all of their clothes, the mother makes all their food food from scratch, everything they eat is something they've grown. She makes their bread from grain from their own property. I mean, it's tremendous what they do for eachother, and, how well behaved and polite these kids are. He probably spends more quality time with his kids than most dads I know with one or two kids. I've always been amazed at large families, but, I definitely see how it can be a much better situation sometimes than the way a lot of smaller families operate. There was a family of many biological and adopted kids that I knew in Germany...I think there were eleven kids total, and, last I heard they were all either in college or already graduated. And, I know the several I went to school with were some of the nicest, most compassionate people I'd ever met.

[Den Anne Pen]

I wonder what religious denomination they are?




I would say the type that don't believe in birth control. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

To each there own but the older one's miss out because there raising the younger ones. :(

[finn's mom]

To each there own but the older one's miss out because there raising the younger ones. :(


Miss out on what? I know I can only go on the few families I've known, and, not on this particular family because I don't know the details of their situation...but, the older kids in the large families I knew moved out of the home almost right out of either high school or finishing home schooling and straight into dorms for college. They were usually no older than 18, they didn't miss out on much that was legal, anyway. ;) Yeah, they did help a lot with the home and the family, but, they still had social lives (mostly church related, but, they did go to dances and out with kids of the same and opposite sexes). If the publicly schooled ones wanted to participate in extracurricular activities, they could. The only things I can think of that they missed out on were the things that they shouldn't have been involved with in the first place! :D

[moosmom]

WAAAAAAAAAAY to crowded for me, thank you very much!!! As long as THEY can support them all, I say, to each his own. It's the ones that keep popping babies out that expect US to support them that really piss me off!!

*dialing phone..."Hellow Guinness Book of Records???"*

[trayi52]

What did families of long ago do with so many children? Some I know had more children than that and did not depend on welfare!

Me, I could not deal with that many children, I had three, and can't keep their names straight, but I will not say anything bad against these people at all. It is their decision to do what they want! Sounds like they are supporting their children and asking for no help doing it.

Willie :)

[Rachel]

Ok, from the way I see things (in my own weird little way) I think that in all likelihood, thoe kids are getting as much, if not MORE attention than the average Amrican kid nowadays. From the religious folks in my area, I know of a few with 10,11, 12 kids. They all are GREAT kids. Honest, polite, helpful. The family means a lot to them, and they rely heavily on each other. Opposed to the typical American family with our 2 children, these families with 12 kids get by remarkably well. They rely on dad as the primary money maker, with mom taking in sewing, making crafts, babysitting, etc to bring in additional income. You'd be amazed at how finaincially stable they are. One family I know of through my FIL currently has 4 kids in college, 6 in private school (Mennonite day school... not some fancy private boarding school or anything! :p) and they pay CASH for everything. No student loans for the kids at all. Dad owns a small store, mom stays at home and makes jellies to sell at craft shows and such.

Thee religious families with a dozen kids are also are odd... in that they SPEND TIME TOGETHER! No cell phones, no computer games, head buried under a Walkman, no ten hour tv marathons. Mom and dad are there when you need them - instead of half listening instead of dividing their attention between cooking dinner, the scintilating soap opera, and the laundry. Mom has HELP folding the laundry, HELP peeling the carrots for dinner. OMG.... ask any of my kids or their friend to make dinner, you might get them to open a can of corn. Its a completely diffrent mind set and lifestyle. Their priorities are a bit different than you or I. Family is top priority. Everything else is non-existant to them.

Sometimes I think we could all take a lesson from them -- in how they relate to each other and separate the outside "noise" from their lives. We all list things as what we "need" - new computer, an ipod, a new couch. They list NECESSITIES... shoes, pants, coat, food. They get the couch when it falls apart and there's a NEED for it. Until then, they happily exist thanking God they even HAVE whatever it is they have.



Having seen the program on TLC about this family, what you have said describes them exactly. Many of us could learn something from watching how this family functions. They definitely are self supporting financially.
The one concern I had was that with the home schooling and church activities being within a real limited group (their church meets in their home and consists of their family and one or two others) the kids are in some respects being sheltered from the *real world*, and I wonder how prepared they will be in dealing with the outside world.

[elizabethann]

And I thought coming from a family of 7 was a lot!! :eek: I once had a friend in high school who came from a family of 12! Personally, I love coming from a big family. And I even wish it was bigger! We may not of had a lot growing up, but we had eachother and that's worth all the tea in China.

:)

[moosmom]

We may not of had a lot growing up, but we had eachother and that's worth all the tea in China.

AMEN to that!!!

[tatsxxx11]

Logan, I think I can answer a few of your questions...saw several programs regarding the family.

The father was a state rep. at one time and he is or was, in insurance sales. Apparently he and his wife had some serious financial difficulties in the past, way into debt, bankruptcy, then finally decided to take control of their finances. They attended some credit managment seminars, financial counseling and apparently have their act together now!

The mother said that they shop for clothes at thrift shops, stating that she will pay 50 cents for a pair of childrens' shoes that others pay 50.00 dollars for and then will hand down outgrown items of clothing to the younger ones. They also shop for the majority of their houshold goods, furnishings, at yard sales and such. I heard about the home they are building, large but simple. She said the kids will be roomed in seperate boy and girl "dorms." I'm not sure what building/housing costs are in their area of the country, perhaps less than in the Northeast. A house that size would cost a fortune to build here, forget about the cost of the land!:D And it's not totally inconceivable that they are receiving some help from family; a good thing! They did say they will be purchasing 4 commercial washers and dryers, commercial frig and stove, etc. and that certanly is costly!

I have to say that that the children were precious on TV, so polite and well mannered and seemingly very well adjusted...and articulate! The mother said that each child is buddied with a younger child, to help the younger sibling with dressing, bathing, homework; a mentor of sorts. This provides an invaluable life lesson in responsibity, sharing for sure! But like Rachel, I do worry about their relative isolation from the "outside world," but perhaps the parents are compensating for that in ways other than school, church, etc.

If this is the path they have chosen for lives and are able to adequately provide for their children, I say God bless them! And each child is a blessing yes, but for me at least, the blessing is not born of the birthing alone. With so many homeless children in need of a loving family, I would hope that perhaps (considering their apparent financial solvency) they might considering opening up their hearts and home to a homeless child in need. I remember seeing a few programs in the past on families with 10, 15, 20 children, half of whom were adopted, many with physical handicaps, disabilities. Like this family, they were amazing!

It's hard for me to imagine being pregnant 14 of the past16 years!:eek: And while the mother's fortitude is certainly commendable, it is really not the best course for her to pursue continued, uninterrupted pregnancies year after year, from a health perspective, especially as she's into her late thirties now. Pregnancy definitely takes it's toll on the body!

Logan, E.D. Hill does "have" 8 children, but hers is a blended family. As I've heard her tell it, both she and her current husband came into the relationship with children from previous marriages. I think she had 3 children with this husband:) Still, a handful! lol

[Kfamr]

And I can barely keep my dog's names straight! :eek:

[ramanth]

The only thing that saddens me is that at what point does she decide 'enough is enough?' When does she start thinking of the kids and not herself? And I'm not talking about the kids not being provided for or loved.

But she will not live forever. When she passes away, how old will the youngest child be? 1 year? 2? 5 or 10?

Sure, to lose a parent for any of the children would be awful, but to lose a parent you hardly get to know. To me, that's selfish on the parents part.

[popcornbird]

But she will not live forever. When she passes away, how old will the youngest child be? 1 year? 2? 5 or 10?

Sure, to lose a parent for any of the children would be awful, but to lose a parent you hardly get to know. To me, that's selfish on the parents part.

I don't understand. She is only 39...a lot of people have their FIRST child at that age. Anyone can die at any age...none of us have any guarantee as to how long we will live. She could very possibly raise all of her children and still be alive and healthy when the youngest is an adult. In fact...its worse if someone has 2 children...and say, the mother dies when the children are 1, 2, 3, 5, 10?? Who would take care of THEM? These kids have so many older siblings to love and care for them if God forbid, anything ever happens to the parents. None of us have any guarantee on how long we will live. You can't guarantee being alive long enough to raise 1 child. How would anyone know??? If that's a reason for her to not have all those children...well...that could be anyone's reason to not have children at all. Death is a part of life...none of us will stay on this Earth forever. I can't comprehend how that could be a reason for her to not have kids. I don't even think she is thinking of herself in this. I mean...how could it possibly be fun to remain pregnant almost 16 years in a row? I bet she's forgotten how it feels to NOT be pregnant by now. Again, it is her choice. If they're happy with it, and if the kids are all happy and well taken care of, none of us should have a problem with it. Its something *I* would never do, but everyone has their own choice in this world, especially when it comes to the amount of children they want.

[ramanth]

I didn't say she shouldn't have kids. And I don't doubt that she's still young and able at the age of 39. It's just that she says she wants more. What if she's able to have more at the age of 80? Should she? Wouldn't she want to see that child grow up?

Why should the other children who are only children themselves have to bear the responsiblity of raising their siblings?

How is that fair to them? How can they go out and meet people and have a social life if they are playing 'mom and dad'?

Yes, accidents happen. People die young and unfairly. I'm simply wondering if she knows when enough is enough.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. It's just common sense. She's been blessed with 16 children. You'd think she'd count her blessings and be content in raising them.

[Twisterdog]

I would rather be covered in honey and staked naked on a red ant hill than have that many kids. Actually ... I would rather go through just about ANYthing than have that many kids! OMG.

My ex's great-grandma and grandpa had twenty-three kids. Seriously. And she lived to be over 100 years old ... and was just about the meanest little woman I've ever met. Go figure ....

And those names. PUH-leeeeese. How cornball can you get??? Jinger?!?!?!? :rolleyes:

But seriously ... as long as they are paying for their upbringing, and not depending on the welfare system (our tax dollars!) to foot the bill ... than it is NO one's business but theirs. Have two dozen kids or have none, as long as you pay for it yourself.

[senorita02]

ILOVEREPTILES, i agree with you 100% !
16 kids! i think it's absurd!