Not Engaged Yet

After All The Baby Talk Around Here Lately...

Apparently it wore off on some people.

The Duggars are expecting their 20th child.  (Thanks, Oceana, for that gem of information)


And...discuss.
I french with my man
Daisypath Anniversary tickers

Re: After All The Baby Talk Around Here Lately...

  • edited December 2011
    I'm sorry, I know it's part of their religion to have as many children as they can, but this has got to stop. After all the complications she experienced with the last baby, you'd think that they would show a little control (we all know how babies are made, and if you're not gonna have anymore, stop shtuping til menopause).

    /end insensitive rant.

    image 170 Invited (holy crap!)

    image 98 are coming to party!

    image 29 have other plans

    image 43 need to respond!

    Daisypath Wedding tickers

    "Bside - You're just too sexy for your own good" ~ leia1979

    "True love = I still love you even though we hang out all the time and most other people would be tired of each other already" ~ flygirlmeg
  • SwazzleSwazzle member
    10000 Comments Seventh Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    edited December 2011
    I'm usually all "to each their own" but this just has to stop.  I agree with Bside & Liv, it's just really irresponsible & I feel bad for those children especially this new baby after the complications with the last. Ridiculous.

    Do they still have their TV show? 



  • DanieKADanieKA member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments
    edited December 2011
    I'm usually all for ranting about irresponsibility and whatnot. And in a way, because of the health and prematurity of their last baby, I do think they are being irresponsible. Without judging someone's religion, there are ways to "natural family plan" without using hormonal birth control. Granted it is not 100% at all, but really, stop doing it around your fertile time! But maybe even natural family planning is off limits because of their Christianity. 

    BUT, I have a hard time hating on the Duggars. They've never been a drain on society. BEFORE the show, from what I've read they were never, ever on any kind of public assistance of any kind. From what I've read they've never been in any kind of debt (they don't live beyond their means. I think they made their money from apartment buildings and a used car lot or two that they own/have owned). They didn't start doing the tv specials until they had 14 or 15 kids, and at first they didn't get paid for those early TLC special (same with John and Kate) though theu did get donated items after they aired. Yes, they now make money from the show, but from what I've watched, they are harmless. There's not that fame wh0re edge I see with other reality tv families.

    I guess I kind of want to stay out of her uterus. They bother me less than most if not all reality tv parents/families. I dunno why. I guess there's a certain innocence about them that I find hard to hate on. 

    I have no problem hating on J&K, the Kardashians or any of the others, though. 
  • AudgiePodgeAudgiePodge member
    2500 Comments Second Anniversary 5 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    I don't see a problem with how they want to live.  That's their prerogative.  They also support their children themselves.  It's not like they're having 20 kids while being on welfare.  The complications (pre-eclampsia) that she had with her last pregnancy could happen to anyone.  It happened to me with my last pregnancy.  Does that mean I  should stop having kids too?
    I'm not good at feelings.

    image
  • peekaboo2011peekaboo2011 member
    Knottie Warrior 5000 Comments 250 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_after-baby-talk-around-here-lately?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:84718f73-a237-487c-b65a-540abb255314Post:17c17519-260a-4623-b382-e3f94e586e61">Re: After All The Baby Talk Around Here Lately...</a>:
    [QUOTE]I'm usually all for ranting about irresponsibility and whatnot. And in a way, because of the health and prematurity of their last baby, I do think they are being irresponsible. Without judging someone's religion, there are ways to "natural family plan" without using hormonal birth control. Granted it is not 100% at all, but really, stop doing it around your fertile time! But maybe even natural family planning is off limits because of their Christianity.  BUT, I have a hard time hating on the Duggars. They've never been a drain on society. BEFORE the show, from what I've read they were never, ever on any kind of public assistance of any kind. From what I've read they've never been in any kind of debt (they don't live beyond their means. I think they made their money from apartment buildings and a used car lot or two that they own/have owned). They didn't start doing the tv specials until they had 14 or 15 kids, and at first they didn't get paid for those early TLC special (same with John and Kate) though theu did get donated items after they aired. Yes, they now make money from the show, but from what I've watched, they are harmless.<strong> There's not that fame wh0re edge I see with other reality tv families.</strong> I guess I kind of want to stay out of her uterus. They bother me less than most if not all reality tv parents/families. I dunno why. I guess there's a certain innocence about them that I find hard to hate on.  I have no problem hating on J&K, the Kardashians or any of the others, though. 
    Posted by DanieKA[/QUOTE]

    <div>See, I think they're almsot worse than other reality tv families.  I can't describe why, but they seriously rub me the wrong way with how they act on tv.  It's just weird.</div>
    I french with my man
    Daisypath Anniversary tickers
  • elanniselannis member
    Seventh Anniversary 2500 Comments Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    I agree that they should have stopped given the complications of their last child. What would happen to all of their 19 children if she not only lost this 20th, but also her life? They'd all be motherless. That seems irresponsible to me.

    ETA: If she has been told that it's unsafe to have more children, as the article implies.
    -Ely

    Daisypath Wedding tickers
  • edited December 2011
    I don't know...personally I think they do a better job of parenting those 19 kids than many do of parenting their 2 kids.

    And if they can afford to have that many kids without government assistance, I say live and let live...
  • edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_after-baby-talk-around-here-lately?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:84718f73-a237-487c-b65a-540abb255314Post:fdb27c44-9dfe-4d76-97a7-3dc0ceffecdf">Re: After All The Baby Talk Around Here Lately...</a>:
    [QUOTE]I don't see a problem with how they want to live.  That's their prerogative.  They also support their children themselves.  It's not like they're having 20 kids while being on welfare.  <strong>The complications (pre-eclampsia) that she had with her last pregnancy could happen to anyone.  It happened to me with my last pregnancy.  Does that mean I  should stop having kids too?
    </strong>Posted by AudgiePodge[/QUOTE]

    Audgie, I understand what you are saying, but Michelle Duggar is also 45 years old. The health risks are way higher at that age, and doesn't a previous experience with complications usually raise a red flag the next time around?

    image 170 Invited (holy crap!)

    image 98 are coming to party!

    image 29 have other plans

    image 43 need to respond!

    Daisypath Wedding tickers

    "Bside - You're just too sexy for your own good" ~ leia1979

    "True love = I still love you even though we hang out all the time and most other people would be tired of each other already" ~ flygirlmeg
  • DanieKADanieKA member
    Knottie Warrior 1000 Comments
    edited December 2011
    peekaboo, yeah I get where you're coming from. They are very hit or miss for some people. And truthfully, I find Jim Bob (Bwahahaha, I can't say his name w/out laughing) kind of creepy, but Michelle is so damn cute and nice and sweet. I can see how it could be sickening, though. 

    I guess to me, they are the ultimate manifestation of MY BODY, MY UTERUS, MY CHOICE. I definitely don't want someone saying I can only have 1 or 2 kids (for the record, my personal max is 3) or saying I can't take hormonal birth control. Or saying I can't have an abortion. Or really saying anything about my personal family planning. So I have a lot of leeway for them and their ever expanding tribe. And the fact that the've never sought gov help is just icing on the cake. 

    But I absolutely understand the other side. That having as many babies as God allows is an idea from the past when people needed hands on the farm and the childhood mortality rate was high. Now I can see the drain on resources and the environment, plus the personal time the younger kids don't get with the parents. I do get both sides. 
  • AudgiePodgeAudgiePodge member
    2500 Comments Second Anniversary 5 Love Its Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_after-baby-talk-around-here-lately?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:84718f73-a237-487c-b65a-540abb255314Post:3c247ad6-43a8-47b9-a557-891d1980925b">Re: After All The Baby Talk Around Here Lately...</a>:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: After All The Baby Talk Around Here Lately... : Audgie, I understand what you are saying, but Michelle Duggar is also 45 years old. The health risks are way higher at that age, and doesn't a previous experience with complications usually raise a red flag the next time around?
    Posted by bsidebella[/QUOTE]
    Preeclampsia has nothing to do with her age.  If she had a complication due to her age being a factor, that is a completely different story.  I think until that happens, people shouldn't be so judgy about her having a herd of children.
    I'm not good at feelings.

    image
  • edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_after-baby-talk-around-here-lately?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:84718f73-a237-487c-b65a-540abb255314Post:5c737ba2-0966-47ee-b5dc-3830468e52f1">Re: After All The Baby Talk Around Here Lately...</a>:
    [QUOTE]Audgie, no, I don't think that means you should stop having kids. Pre-eclampsia is random, though your risk for it happening again goes up if you have had a previous pregnancy with that particular complication. You are also not 45 years old, and have not had 19 previous pregnancies and have not had three c-sections and at least two sets of multiples, all of which make the pregnancy more high-risk. 
    Posted by LivLeighton[/QUOTE]

    Liv, as always, you say it better than I do.

    image 170 Invited (holy crap!)

    image 98 are coming to party!

    image 29 have other plans

    image 43 need to respond!

    Daisypath Wedding tickers

    "Bside - You're just too sexy for your own good" ~ leia1979

    "True love = I still love you even though we hang out all the time and most other people would be tired of each other already" ~ flygirlmeg
  • Hazel_BHazel_B member
    2500 Comments
    edited December 2011
    Isn't her pregnancy less high risk at 45 and it being her 20th child than if it was someone 45 and their first?

    I don't watch their show, but if they are supporting themselves then I don't see what the big deal is. Wouldn't be my choice of lifestyle though.
  • PaigeMcCPaigeMcC member
    5000 Comments Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    I think they're selfish.

    I have no trouble with people having hoards of kids but what I do have trouble with is WHY can't you adopt some children that actually need homes?  Why do you have to keep pro-creating? If you can afford 20+ kids, why not help out some that really need the help and could use all that love instead of just making more?

    "Popular on the internetz..."
    image

    Canada is kind of like a whole other world with new things to discover that us americans only dream of. - Narwhal
    Paige I would like to profess my love for you and your brilliant mind. - breezerb
    Murried Bio
  • doubleSS07doubleSS07 member
    500 Comments 100 Love Its Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    I am really a live and let live kinda gal as long as whatever it is you are doing isn't hurting me in any way go on do ur thang!  At first I thought "this broad is cra cra with all these kids"!  After seeing them for a few years though really don't mind this particular family, mostly because they do take care of their own and they do not burden government assistance programs.  I also see a very close knit family who seem to enjoy each other, take joy from the simple things in life and are very active in communities here and in other countries.  I wish I saw more of that..shoot I wish I had that kind of family myself since mine is so f'ed up.  Who are we to judge their religious beliefs and the way they are raising their family no matter what its size. 

    Personally, if it were me I think that after the scare with the last baby and the fact that my eldest child is now on baby #2, I would at least take non-medical precautions against another pregnancy.  I would want to be healthy and present to share in the gazillion grandchildren I was bound to have and take a break from being pregnant every year..geez! 


    Daisypath Anniversary tickers
  • polkadot111polkadot111 member
    1000 Comments Second Anniversary Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    I think it's wonderful. I seriously believe that they do a MUCH better job parenting their children than many other parents with just a few kids. I know so many families (social work) who leave their kids home alone and where the parents are completely out of the picture- the kids fend completely for themselves. Michelle and Jim Bob sure are around and they seem like they really try to parent their kids. They're definetly not 'checked out' of parenting. She is such a sweetheart, and I think Jim Bob is too. I think that they try their best with their children, and I think do a good job.

    It's just something we are not used to anymore in America. Having any more than 5 kids is crazy to most of us. Just because something is 'weird' or 'abnormal' to us doesn't mean we can say it's wrong. That's what many say about gay marriage, and I think that stance is a ridiculous reason to be against something.

    And no, preeclampsia happened not because of her age. None of her complications have been because of her age.
    Used to be bourgehm. +1,500 posts. Silly knot
    image
  • edited December 2011
    While I am usually of the belief that we should be able to do what we want with our bodies, there are certain things that I feel strongly about, like abortion, not gonna get on a soapbox here nor do I want to hear your arguement on it, just one of the things I feel is wrong.  In the Dugger's case I have watched a little bit of their show, and I really do think that they are a good family, they teach their kids to value God and family first and I think it's great.  After their last child was born at just 25 weeks and struggled to survive I really thought they would stop, though.  I was kind of shocked to hear that they are giving it another go-round, but to each their own I suppose.

    ETA:  I know this sounds like I'm bad mouthing them, and I don't mean it to, but I also can't help but wonder if they would be able to afford to take care of all their children if not for the tv show and the income that it has generated. 
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • Allisonesq77Allisonesq77 member
    10 Comments
    edited December 2011

    I think if they can take care of all of the kids without help from the state, than I applaud them for that.

    BUT. How is it even possible for them to provide all the love and nurturing that kids need in their formative years with so many?

    AND. Haven't they figured out yet what causes pregnancy? Just sayin'.

  • edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_after-baby-talk-around-here-lately?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:84718f73-a237-487c-b65a-540abb255314Post:480dba0b-df15-4c8f-bdb3-cac210b97ea9">Re: After All The Baby Talk Around Here Lately...</a>:
    [QUOTE]I think they're selfish. I have no trouble with people having hoards of kids but what I do have trouble with is<strong> WHY can't you adopt some children that actually need homes?  Why do you have to keep pro-creating? If you can afford 20+ kids, why not help out some that really need the help and could use all that love instead of just making more?</strong>
    Posted by PaigeMcC[/QUOTE]

    <div>
    </div><div>*nods head in agreement* </div><div>
    </div><div>I find the Duggars kinda sweet and have no issue with how they choose to live, but an excellent point is raised here.</div>
  • edited December 2011
    I do think they appear to do a much better job of raising kids than a lot of people do and it's totally their choice to live the way they do- BUT I do agree with others that have said it's not fair to the older kids. The older ones pretty much are responsible for the younger ones and none of them probably EVER get to be alone because there's so many of them! I also think that once your grown children start having babies then that's your cue to stop.
     




  • paintgirlpaintgirl member
    1000 Comments Third Anniversary
    edited December 2011

    I don't care how many kids they have. I just hope they don't start randomly falling out. (That sh(t has to get worn out eventually.) Mental note: Avoid Arkansas in about 7 months.

  • edited December 2011
    We were talking about this at work today,I feel a bit torn. It does seem a bit selfish.  Do these kids really get the individual attention they need and deserve? On the other hand as long as they aren't collecting welfare for it, it's hard for me to judge how people choose to raise their family or how many they have. I think 20 is too many I'd also be concerned about the risks at her age and the problems she had with the last baby/pregnancy.

    Anniversary

  • Elle1036Elle1036 member
    5000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 25 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited December 2011
    There have been some good points made in this thread.

    I'm not going to tough the medical issues because I don't know enough about it to know whether little Josie's issues were due to the number of Michelle's pregnancies, and there are things about the Duggars that bug me, and I do occasionally indulge in making fun of them, and I definitely don't hold the same set of values they do, but when it comes down to how I really, truly feel about this:

    I call myself "pro-choice," which to me means that I respect everyone's reproductive choices, not just those I would choose for myself.  Yes, the size of the Duggar family causes some things to be done a little differently (like the whole older kids raising the younger kids thing) but all of the Duggar family members are happy and healthy.  That's a lot more than you can say about too many families around the world.
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards