If we were supporting those kids i might say we have a say not that we do because we cant make someone stop having babies.  I would be livid if someone told me how many kids i could have, sorry

I said that it's none of our business. I wouldn't go up to her and tell her to stop. Now if we were friends in real life and she asked me my opinion, I would tell her that I thought she needed to stop but seeing as we aren't friends, I don't think that conversation will be happening any time soon.

I said "it's none of our business". but I will say that I fear for her health. At some point this is going to do serious damage to her body.  I don't mean to sound like a
jerk, but how can her uterus handle it?? I am on baby #2 and it takes
such a toll on your body. I can only imagine that at some point soon it
would be a good idea to stop for her sake. I just hope that for as many children as she has, that her body can handle it and she doesn't have serious complications that could ever potentially leave all these poor children without their mother.

I reupped my People subscription when I went on maternity leave, so I have that very issue sitting in my house.
 
It's not my business in the sense of I have any actual authority to tell anyone how to live their lives.  It is my business in the sense that if you put your life on television and on the cover of entertainment magazines, I am likely to develop an opinion about you and will feel entitled to express it because you are making a career out of being a public figure.
 
I don't object to large families in the abstract.  I do object to the extremely heavy parenting burden they place on their older kids.  And certainly I think that when they have a baby who is in the hospital weighing two pounds who most likely will have significant developmental delays and may end up with permanent disabilities, realistically, they are facing parenting a child who I think would make it difficult for the most capable and involved parents to effectively parent the 17 other kids they have at home plus additional infants.

Deborah_BZCL wrote:I reupped my People subscription when I went on maternity leave, so I have that very issue sitting in my house.
 
It's not my business in the sense of I have any actual authority to tell anyone how to live their lives.  It is my business in the sense that if you put your life on television and on the cover of entertainment magazines, I am likely to develop an opinion about you and will feel entitled to express it because you are making a career out of being a public figure.
 
I don't object to large families in the abstract.  I do object to the extremely heavy parenting burden they place on their older kids.  And certainly I think that when they have a baby who is in the hospital weighing two pounds who most likely will have significant developmental delays and may end up with permanent disabilities, realistically, they are facing parenting a child who I think would make it difficult for the most capable and involved parents to effectively parent the 17 other kids they have at home plus additional infants.

 
Well said. I also agree with Danielle above, but I don't know how to double quote.

I said "no" but it's really none of our business. My great aunt had 24 singletons, at least Mrs. Duggar has had a set or two of twins in there...  Quite honestly I don't have a problem with how they run their family, it works for them and their kids are well taken care of. What bugs me is that people seem to have a problem with them yet they appear to me to be one of the most stable families I've ever seen. Their kids will know how to take care of themselves and their families when they grow up.  Problem is where? Oh that's right, they have kids who actually are responsible and happy...

She had pre eclampsia right?  And if I remember correctly from admittedly watching their show she also had it with her 2 pregnancy, a twin pregnancy.  Pre eclampsia is a risk of pregnancy it has nothing to do with her age or number of previous pregnancies, therefore I feel that it is none of my buisness. 
I think I would be more concerned(although it would still be none of my buisness) if the complication was directly related to her age and or number of pregnancies.
Do I agree with their choices? NO Do they agree with mine? I doubt it but there is no reason to judge they are happy in their life and I am happy in mine

IIRC, Michelle and Jim-Bob are not planning to have another child, and they didn't 'plan' most of their current children. They simply do nothing to prevent children as a part of their quiverfull branch of religion. I think they will continue to subscribe to the belief that God will not give them more than they can handle and that any extra blessings he decides to bestow upon them will be welcomed. Hence the respones of "We may have more children" as in they do not believe it is up to them. I can't say that their belief is wrong, but I do think her health should be a concern. Obviously her body had some difficulties this last time and she may not survive another pregnancy. If I were close to her, I would express my concern, but ultimately it is their decision and none of my business. Thus far they have raised some very intelligent, loving, wonderful people and I don't think I have any right to tell them they should do things differently. I don't find the idea of assigning my younger children 'buddies' at six months old and weaning early to encourage a return to fertility a good choice for my family, though.
 
I have to say, I have been asked by several family members about when I plan to stop being a surrogate. I am pregnant now, and am talking to potential IP's about doing a sibling project in the future meaning at least two more pregnancies. All in all, that will be7 pregnancies. I am not sure I will be ready to quit after that, but I guess we'll see. I get offended every time someone asks as if it's any of their business how many children I plan to usher into the world.

I said none of my business, because it's not. My tax money isn't supporting them. They seem to be taking care of their children well. Every pregnancy has it's risks and they know that. If I were her postpartum nurse though, she would make me really nervous! I've seen women after their 6th baby hemorrhage really bad, even after using a ton of medications to stop it.
 
On another note, I watched an interview with the Duggars in which they said they are not part of a quiverfull movement like everyone keeps saying they are. They just believe in allowing God to determine how many kids they have, but they don't consider themselves part of any movement.

Rachele_butterflidrm wrote:IIRC, Michelle and Jim-Bob are not planning to have another child, and they didn't 'plan' most of their current children. They simply do nothing to prevent children as a part of their quiverfull branch of religion. I think they will continue to subscribe to the belief that God will not give them more than they can handle and that any extra blessings he decides to bestow upon them will be welcomed. Hence the respones of "We may have more children" as in they do not believe it is up to them. I can't say that their belief is wrong, but I do think her health should be a concern. Obviously her body had some difficulties this last time and she may not survive another pregnancy. If I were close to her, I would express my concern, but ultimately it is their decision and none of my business. Thus far they have raised some very intelligent, loving, wonderful people and I don't think I have any right to tell them they should do things differently. I don't find the idea of assigning my younger children 'buddies' at six months old and weaning early to encourage a return to fertility a good choice for my family, though.
 
I have to say, I have been asked by several family members about when I plan to stop being a surrogate. I am pregnant now, and am talking to potential IP's about doing a sibling project in the future meaning at least two more pregnancies. All in all, that will be7 pregnancies. I am not sure I will be ready to quit after that, but I guess we'll see. I get offended every time someone asks as if it's any of their business how many children I plan to usher into the world.

 
 
To the bolded part how do you know this?  I have heard this but I have also heard that Michelle herself says that she gets pregnant while breastfeeding thus her supply drying up(mine did the same when I got pregnant when dd was 11months, I only had one period 3month prior) and she has just never been able to bf'ed past 9 months.  let me go find the link if I can
 
Okay here is a link of an interview with Michelle about 1/4 of the way down she talks about her menstration and LAM
http://www.babygooroo.com/index.php/2009/03/30/after-18-children-breastfeeding-for-michelle-duggar-continues-to-be-a-learning-experience/

I think its great that they have the family they want & are taking good care of them.  I see absolutely nothing wrong with having large families.  Its only a couple of generations ago that this was the norm (my grandparents come from large families) & in some parts of the world  still is.  When we lived in the UAE the average number of babies per woman was 12!   Most women had no problems having that many children.   I really feel  that women's bodies are made for having babies & lots of them. 
 
 

It's none of our business.  I think she's doing a disservice to her children by having so many and not being able to be there for them very much and she's putting any future children at risk because she has had so many, including (I think) 4 c-sections and now pre-eclampsia.  She's also over 40, which automatically puts her pregnancy in the high risk category so I think any children she has now are more likely to suffer from some sort of issue, even if it's something short-term.  That said, they are able to support all of their children and they all seem very loved and well-behaved so I don't have any problem with it.  That, and I wouldn't want them telling me how many children I should have so I wouldn't do that to them.  That life isn't for everyone, but it's their decision to make.

I for one like the Duggars.  I try to channel Michelle in my times of mommy stress.  She's my zen mommy idol.

I know I stand alone on this, but I don't think there is anything "wrong" with having a buddy system or asking the older children to help with the younger kids.  While I don't think it's conventional, I fail to see how this practice will make them horrible people.   It's not something I would do, but still I get the feeling that these kids are very well cared for and their parents love them dearly.  <I'll stop myself from going on a rant about people with one child who make horrible parents.>

The only question I have though is why is it when I see them feeding the babies, they are always lying down?  I worry they are going to choke every time I've seen this.

Jenny

Honestly no it's not my business but since you asked, yes I think enough is enough!

I said its none of my business- but honestly, the children they have seem very responsible, respectful, caring, and like good human beings. If you can raise 18 children to be good human beings, productive members of society---why not?? They also have done it all with no outside financial help. If I were paying to support those 19 kids, I would have said they should stop. But they had them, raised them well, and took care of them financially.....they did their job as parents, so why criticize them?
 
There are so many parents out there who aren't raising one child well....and so many kids that would be blessed to have a home as stable and caring as the Duggar's home appears to be.

my2lovebugs wrote:I said its none of my business- but honestly, the children they have seem very responsible, respectful, caring, and like good human beings. If you can raise 18 children to be good human beings, productive members of society---why not?? They also have done it all with no outside financial help. If I were paying to support those 19 kids, I would have said they should stop. But they had them, raised them well, and took care of them financially.....they did their job as parents, so why criticize them?
 
There are so many parents out there who aren't raising one child well....and so many kids that would be blessed to have a home as stable and caring as the Duggar's home appears to be.

 

I agree 100%.  

Jenny

Deborah_BZCL wrote:I reupped my People subscription when I went on maternity leave, so I have that very issue sitting in my house.
 
It's not my business in the sense of I have any actual authority to tell anyone how to live their lives.  It is my business in the sense that if you put your life on television and on the cover of entertainment magazines, I am likely to develop an opinion about you and will feel entitled to express it because you are making a career out of being a public figure.
 
I don't object to large families in the abstract.  I do object to the extremely heavy parenting burden they place on their older kids.  And certainly I think that when they have a baby who is in the hospital weighing two pounds who most likely will have significant developmental delays and may end up with permanent disabilities, realistically, they are facing parenting a child who I think would make it difficult for the most capable and involved parents to effectively parent the 17 other kids they have at home plus additional infants.

 

I agree with the above!! I'm all for large families, though. As long as there is equal attention spread among all the children and the older aren't caring for the younger.

Another thing I am wondering that I don't think has been mentioned: how many pregnancies can a human being carry? Once you get pregnant and the placenta attaches to the uterus, another placenta can NEVER attach there because of the scar tissue. So, you only have limited room in your uterus for a placenta to attach. It increases the likelihood of having placenta previa. As long as she recognizes the risk she is putting herself and her unborn child into, then it's her own decision.

Dorydorito wrote:I for one like the Duggars.  I try to channel Michelle in my times of mommy stress.  She's my zen mommy idol.
I know I stand alone on this, but I don't think there is anything "wrong" with having a buddy system or asking the older children to help with the younger kids.  While I don't think it's conventional, I fail to see how this practice will make them horrible people.   It's not something I would do, but still I get the feeling that these kids are very well cared for and their parents love them dearly.  
The only question I have though is why is it when I see them feeding the babies, they are always lying down?  I worry they are going to choke every time I've seen this.
Jenny

 
I think that Jim Bob and Michelle honestly do what they feel is best for their kids and are good parents. However, I don't agree with the buddy system at all. I don't think it makes them horrible people but I think that kids need to be kids, and I don't think it is a childs or even teenagers responsibility to parent the younger siblings. Helping out is one thing, but honestly it seems to me that they PARENT their "buddy". They are responsible for feeding them, dressing them, keeping them in line, teaching them, ect ect ect...isn't that the parents job? I would think that at least a few of them are going to grow up resenting their parents for not having a childhood. I could see them not wanting kids of their own because they already spent their childhood raising children. I don't think their reproductive decisions are our business, but I do think enough is enough for the same reasons Deborah stated, its likely this new baby is going to have added difficulties and they are going to need all the help they can get!

my2lovebugs wrote:I said its none of my business- but honestly, the children they have seem very responsible, respectful, caring, and like good human beings. If you can raise 18 children to be good human beings, productive members of society---why not?? They also have done it all with no outside financial help. If I were paying to support those 19 kids, I would have said they should stop. But they had them, raised them well, and took care of them financially.....they did their job as parents, so why criticize them?
 
There are so many parents out there who aren't raising one child well....and so many kids that would be blessed to have a home as stable and caring as the Duggar's home appears to be.

 
I totally agree. Also I am pretty sure that her doctor has made her aware of the risks. She has been with the same doctor for most of her pregnancies. And I remember on one episode that the doctor was talking about how well Michelle's body handled the pregnancies that she was made to have be babies and she was really good at it. Michelle herself has stated that she is aware of the risks that she understands after 40 it is harder to get pregnant and have normal pregnancies. But I think that just goes back to they trust God to handle everything.

Live.Love.Laugh wrote:

I for one like the Duggars.  I try to channel Michelle in my times of mommy stress.  She's my zen mommy idol.
I know I stand alone on this, but I don't think there is anything "wrong" with having a buddy system or asking the older children to help with the younger kids.  While I don't think it's conventional, I fail to see how this practice will make them horrible people.   It's not something I would do, but still I get the feeling that these kids are very well cared for and their parents love them dearly.  
The only question I have though is why is it when I see them feeding the babies, they are always lying down?  I worry they are going to choke every time I've seen this.
Jenny

  
I think that Jim Bob and Michelle honestly do what they feel is best for their kids and are good parents. However, I don't agree with the buddy system at all. I don't think it makes them horrible people but I think that kids need to be kids, and I don't think it is a childs or even teenagers responsibility to parent the younger siblings. Helping out is one thing, but honestly it seems to me that they PARENT their "buddy". They are responsible for feeding them, dressing them, keeping them in line, teaching them, ect ect ect...isn't that the parents job? I would think that at least a few of them are going to grow up resenting their parents for not having a childhood. I could see them not wanting kids of their own because they already spent their childhood raising children. I don't think their reproductive decisions are our business, but I do think enough is enough for the same reasons Deborah stated, its likely this new baby is going to have added difficulties and they are going to need all the help they can get!

 
Bold 1: So do I but they need to learn responsibility too. I don't see how the Duggar kids haven't been allowed to be kids. They seem to be kids on the show... They're just not spoiled, that's all.

Bold 2: They know this. They talked about it on both the special of Josie's birth and the first episode of the new season. Why that means they shouldn't have more is beyond me...

californiabelle wrote:It's none of our business.  I think she's doing a disservice to her children by having so many and not being able to be there for them very much and she's putting any future children at risk because she has had so many, including (I think) 4 c-sections and now pre-eclampsia.  She's also over 40, which automatically puts her pregnancy in the high risk category so I think any children she has now are more likely to suffer from some sort of issue, even if it's something short-term.  That said, they are able to support all of their children and they all seem very loved and well-behaved so I don't have any problem with it.  That, and I wouldn't want them telling me how many children I should have so I wouldn't do that to them.  That life isn't for everyone, but it's their decision to make.

 
How is it a disservice? She home-schools them and is home w/ them most of the time. He has his own business I think so it's not like he isn't ever home.

She had pre-e before so that's kinda a moot point. It's a risk with any pregnancy so it doesn't make a great argument. 

To Brandylyn: My great aunt had 24 singletons so I think how many someone can carry is largely dependent on how they're built.

Rachele: I would have to say that since God knows whether or not she is physically capable of another baby it's fine to leave it up to God. If she can't handle it again it won't happen. I'm pretty sure they pray about it and say "God, if it's your will for another one, so be it.". That's kind of what we're doing right now. We will stop after another 1 or 2 though because we don't have the money for more but I'm in their boat: it's not so much that you should have as many as possible but it's up to God...

Deborah_BZCL wrote:I reupped my People subscription when I went on maternity leave, so I have that very issue sitting in my house.
 
It's not my business in the sense of I have any actual authority to tell anyone how to live their lives.  It is my business in the sense that if you put your life on television and on the cover of entertainment magazines, I am likely to develop an opinion about you and will feel entitled to express it because you are making a career out of being a public figure.
 
I don't object to large families in the abstract.  I do object to the extremely heavy parenting burden they place on their older kids.  And certainly I think that when they have a baby who is in the hospital weighing two pounds who most likely will have significant developmental delays and may end up with permanent disabilities, realistically, they are facing parenting a child who I think would make it difficult for the most capable and involved parents to effectively parent the 17 other kids they have at home plus additional infants.

   
I have strong feelings about this, but Deborah said it much more eloquently than I could have.  Their "buddy system" goes way beyond just helping out.  Those kids are parenting their younger siblings.  A PARENT needs to be the one to get up with a sick child in the middle of the night -- that's a terrible burden (and an unfair expectation) to place on a young teenager, who is really still a child themself.

Phronsie, go ahead and flame me, saying that it teaches them responsibility & that children these days are lazy, like you always do.  It will NEVER change my opinion that it's WRONG.

None of anyone outside of their families business.  Now, as someone else said, if she were a friend & asked my opinion I would tell her that it might be enough.  But I might not. 


I watched the special on Josie's birth.  I was blown away by those children.  They made Christmas treats for the local firefighters and police officers.  Yes, while Mom & Dad were 3 hours away with the baby.  I loved how the children asked the police officers for their autographs!  Shocked the officers when they did it!  I thought that it was great.  They are polite, they are respectful, yet they have some TWISTED senses of humor!  Did anyone see the episode, a while back, where People magazine came in for a photo shoot & some of the little boys decided to wrap up a doll like she was the new baby and drop "her" in front of the photographers?  LOL  I LOVE it!  They pull pranks on the camera people regularly.  It's hysterical.  They have some great sense of humor.  (Well, great to me because they're like mine!) 


there is one thing that I find odd, don't know if anyone else has noticed it.  The dil, Anna?, calls her "Mrs. Duggar".  Not Mom (which I don't call my mil that either), but also not Michelle.  Does anyone else find that odd?  Or have I just not caught her calling her Michelle?

*~*Granola~Flutterby*~* wrote:None of anyone outside of their families business.  Now, as someone else said, if she were a friend & asked my opinion I would tell her that it might be enough.  But I might not. 

I watched the special on Josie's birth.  I was blown away by those children.  They made Christmas treats for the local firefighters and police officers.  Yes, while Mom & Dad were 3 hours away with the baby.  I loved how the children asked the police officers for their autographs!  Shocked the officers when they did it!  I thought that it was great.  They are polite, they are respectful, yet they have some TWISTED senses of humor!  Did anyone see the episode, a while back, where People magazine came in for a photo shoot & some of the little boys decided to wrap up a doll like she was the new baby and drop "her" in front of the photographers?  LOL  I LOVE it!  They pull pranks on the camera people regularly.  It's hysterical.  They have some great sense of humor.  (Well, great to me because they're like mine!) 

there is one thing that I find odd, don't know if anyone else has noticed it.  The dil, Anna?, calls her "Mrs. Duggar".  Not Mom (which I don't call my mil that either), but also not Michelle.  Does anyone else find that odd?  Or have I just not caught her calling her Michelle?

 
It's probably out of respect, and because she did it for so long. I can't call people's parents I grew up w/ by their first names, even though they don't care if I use their first name. And yes, her name is Anna. But yeah, force of habit type of thing probably. Not weird to me because that's how I am.

~supermom~ wrote:I said that it's none of our business. I wouldn't go up to her and tell her to stop. Now if we were friends in real life and she asked me my opinion, I would tell her that I thought she needed to stop but seeing as we aren't friends, I don't think that conversation will be happening any time soon.

 
ITA.     BTW, Supermom....go make me some babies