16 kids and wanting more!!!

[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!
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!!! ) 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!!) 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! 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. They're the reason our jails are filled to capacity, and then some. It all boils down to personal choice, and I am happy to be mother to many! Animals

[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.

[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! 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! 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!

[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?!?!?!?

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.