Social Question

MissAusten's avatar

The Duggars are expecting their 19th child. Thoughts on this?

Asked by MissAusten (16142points) September 1st, 2009

The Duggar family of Arkansas are now expecting their 19th child, according to this article.

I know questions have been asked here in the past concerning the Duggars, but now that they’re having yet another baby, I wondered how others feel about it. I’ll save my own opinion for later in the discussion!

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

94 Answers

perplexism's avatar

So long as all the children are being cared for in every aspect in which they should, why should I care? Have 30 children. You better be able to take care of every single one, though.

casheroo's avatar

The only thing I truly care about is her uterus. I can’t fathom how it’s able to stay put. And I’m not saying this to be one of those people who says it without knowing….because I know of elderly ladies who have had 8 or so children and had their uterus practically fall out, so they needed hysterectomies. It blows my mind that she can physically still have them.
I’m over all the other arguments.

filmfann's avatar

I occasionally work on genealogy, and I will tell you 19 kids was the norm 100 years ago, except the child mortality rate was much higher.

Darwin's avatar

They are nuts.

teh_kvlt_liberal's avatar

More chances to get laid…

AstroChuck's avatar

This pretty much sums up how I feel.

rooeytoo's avatar

If each child is to get one uninterrupted hour of mom’s time each day, it doesn’t leave much time for mom to sleep and cook and clean.

I think the older kids end up raising the younger ones, I don’t know if that is fair???

I do sort of think that a kid deserves more attention and parental supervision than 1 mom and 1 dad (who I assume works and is not home that much) could give to that many kids.

Sarcasm's avatar

@eponymoushipster That’s what I was thinking.

As long as they’re able to financially handle it, I guess I don’t have a problem with it.

If you’re someone like Octomom who was (is?) unemployed, and living with financial assistance, there’s an issue.

Buttonstc's avatar

They aren’t using the welfare system, the ones they currently have seem to be sensible, well adjusted, and without developmental delays ( unlike three of the Octomom’s) and they aren’t about to split up like John and Kate. So what’s the problem??

Aside from the fact that they choose to be on TV similar to the Roloff’s how is how many kids they choose to have up for judgment by us??

Back in olden days they would have been admired rather than regarded as oddities.

They are the total opposite of the dipsy doodle Octomom so I think it’s good to see a sensible large family with their heads on straight. It’s refreshing.

Darwin's avatar

What is scary is the oldest daughter is now married and she “can’t wait to be a mom.” There may be a lot more Duggars soon.

SuperMouse's avatar

I am glad that Mrs. Duggar got a new hairstyle.

If she wants to drop this many babies more power to her, but I think they are out of their minds. I also don’t think it is alright to give their older kids so much responsibility for taking care of the younger ones. Mom and dad made the choice to have a small army, they should be responsible for rearing said army.

@Buttonstc my mom had six kids in the 1960’s no one admired her for that, they just assumed she was Catholic. Margaret Sanger began Planned Parenthood as a way for women to obtain birth control as a means to stop being forced to spend their entire lives pregnant. I find nothing admirable about raising a big family, it is a choice, just like any other.

DrasticDreamer's avatar

It disgusts me.

We already have an overpopulation problem – families like this just make it a lot worse.

The older children help to raise the younger ones and thus lose out on a lot of their own childhood.

There is no way in hell that the parents spend enough quality time on each of their children.

Dis-gust-ing.

MissAusten's avatar

I agree with many of you, that they are to be commended for raising their family on their own, responsibly, and (apparently) doing a great job of raising the kids to be decent people. I’ve only seen bits and pieces of the TV show, but they seem like a well-adjusted group of kids. I think it’s amazing that they are financially independent, and have been since before the TV show. I remember seeing something about them on TV back when they had 15 kids, and the dad said they don’t buy anything they can’t pay cash for, including their home.

I always wonder, like @casheroo , when the mom’s body will just give out. I’d worry about possibly not surviving another pregnancy and leaving my family to go on without me. I’d also worry about the health of any more babies, but perhaps this is where their faith comes into play. I have a lot more respect for them than Jon & Kate (so, so sick of them) and Octomom. They shouldn’t even be compared, IMO.

I don’t understand some of the hostility I’ve seen in comments like the ones after the article I linked to above. Personally, I’m at my limit with three kids and cannot even imagine having 16 more. I think what’s interesting about the Duggars isn’t how many kids they’ve managed to have, but how well they seem to be doing. I wonder about how the kids get any individual attention, but they seem to be thriving anyway.

BBSDTfamily's avatar

If they can care for them, great. But I don’t see how they can have time to spend nurturing each one’s individual personality and building relationships with them. I just think that’s too many for any couple to handle.

casheroo's avatar

@Darwin I know their son is married and expecting this October. But, I watch the show and he and his wife seem like they do not want to have as many children as “god” allows. It’s just the impression I got. Oh, and they’re doing all “M” names for Michelle’s honor.
Also, their daughter Jinger rolls her eyes and is never excited for the pregnancies…not all of them follow blindly.

bestlifepossible's avatar

I am amazed at the diverse opinions here…but actually it makes perfect sense…the ones that are against the Duggars are not understanding how they do it (and to be quite honest, it is beyond my thinking of how I could do this) and have ideas that they are being supported and spoiled like the “other” multiple celebs out there. They are the farthest from that. So then they are accused of being religious nuts or boring when they are just a good Christian family – is that so bad in comparison with the others? I agree with some that say big families used to be the norm – it did before we all got to be so selfish….they somehow make it work and the kids are much more responsible at a young age – good training for when they get older. More power to them!

eponymoushipster's avatar

I don’t think it was mentioned already, but according to the news, the oldest son is married and his wife is pregnant, and their child is due before the No. 19 makes its appearance through the wizard’s sleeve. That’s too many little kids.

Darwin's avatar

@casheroo – I don’t watch the show but I see the trailer for it in which the new Duggar expresses her desire to be a mom.

SuperMouse's avatar

@bestlifepossible I don’t see where anyone in this thread accuses the Duggars of being religions nuts. Just plain nuts yes, but not religious nuts.

@eponymoushipster, I wonder if they let the oldest and his wife move out or if he must stay at the family compound until the young ens he is responsible for are all done.

Darwin's avatar

I did say I think they are nuts, but I made no reference to their religious beliefs. It’s just that having that many kids would wear me out completely. It would be like being a school teacher who never, ever gets to go home (I think they home school, too, so that is a very apt analogy).

trailsillustrated's avatar

I just can’t understand it- a baby at 43 or whatever? I think she’s too old to be having babies. What about when the baby is 13 and she’s mid-fifties? It sounds so hard but they’re mormons aren’t they- those families always seem to do well.

MissAusten's avatar

@trailsillustrated Actually, I think they’re Baptists.

photographcrash's avatar

There are so many kids out there with no homes stuck in the foster systems whose lives will never be able to live up to potential. If they are so hell bent on having a small army of children.. maybe they should consider adopting a couple.

perplexism's avatar

@trailsillustrated I don’t think 43 is too old. Maybe if you’re pushing 60, that’d be up for debate. But I do know a lot women who have had children in their forties. You can still have stamina in your 50s to take care of children.

Darwin's avatar

As someone who adopted instead of spending lots of bucks on fertility treatments, I am wholeheartedly in agreement with @photographcrash. If you want huge numbers of kids, try adopting some of them.

eponymoushipster's avatar

@SuperMouse that’s what i was thinking to.

casheroo's avatar

@SuperMouse Josh (the oldest son) lives in his own place with his wife. He works for his father though.

DominicX's avatar

Yuck.

Not interested. And as for them being religious nuts, according to Wikipedia, they follow anti-gay doctrine and don’t believe in letting their daughters wear pants or any of their kids attending college. And yeah, I’m kind of tired of all these reality shows about people with a million kids. I just don’t find it that interesting. Hell, I used to think I had a big family being 1 of 4 kids.

Sounds like nothing more than a product of their desire to not use contraception and the man’s desire for constant sex.

Likeradar's avatar

GA, @rooeytoo. Aside from that, it’s nunya bidnezz since they are able to support them on their own.
It’s certainly not a choice I would make or particularly understand, and part of me thinks Michelle and Jim Bob are nutso, and I feel a bit for the kids. But they seem like a loving family, so go ahead and breed away.

@trailsillustrated They’re part of the Quiverfull movement.

hookecho's avatar

my honest thought is why should I care about people who are famous for no reason other than having a lot of kids. The bar to be accepted as a celebrity just keeps getting lower.

filmfann's avatar

It’s like the beginning of Idiocracy

Buttonstc's avatar

@supermouse

I guess I should have clarified what I meant by olden days :)

I was speaking more of frontier times and such when the more kids you had to help you work the farm the better. Larger families were envied since even when grown many times the kids stayed on and became a larger and more influential group.

I understand what you are saying about birth control freeing women to make choices. What I find a little odd is that there is zero respect for a woman who has made a CHOICE which runs counter to the majority. To have this many children was her choice as it doesn’t appear anyone held a gun to her head.

Those who so ardently proclaim allowing women choice might do well to look at how hypocritical it is of them to excoriate her for her CHOICE.

It certainly wouldn’t be my choice, ha ha but I think her choice is as valid for her as those who choose to limit the size of their family.

Absolute hypocrisy.

Facade's avatar

Great for them if they are truly happy. I, on the other hand, will never put that burden upon myself and my life. I feel no need to pop out something that will need my attention and money for as long as it lives.

aprilsimnel's avatar

Those Quiverfull types bug me, as I’ve said before. I wish they were honest about who they are and why they want so many children.

tinyfaery's avatar

Creepy, religious, entitlement. Ick!

Facade's avatar

@aprilsimnel Why does there need to be some hidden agenda?

BBSDTfamily's avatar

@Facade In the ideal circumstance, only for the first 18 years of it’s life…. but we know so often that does not happen (I’m gonna make damn sure it does w/ mine though, unless there is some extreme reason for letting them latch on any longer- I will not be an enabler!)

cookieman's avatar

My reactions to this topic in order of occurance:

1) Who the hell are the Duggars?!

2) Better them than me.

3) Could I please hug @photographcrash for the best answer ever?

Facade's avatar

@BBSDTfamily Right. All the grown people that I know are still sucking their mother’s teat. But they’ve just been coddled to much.

aprilsimnel's avatar

Because the Quiverfull people are terrified that there aren’t enough evangelical Christian people in the world, so they have to have more children now. That’s their agenda. An excerpt from an NPR report:

That’s also the hope of Nancy Campbell, a leader of the Quiverfull movement and author of Be Fruitful and Multiply.

“The womb is such a powerful weapon; it’s a weapon against the enemy,” Campbell says.

Campbell has 35 grandchildren. She and her husband stopped at six kids, and it is her great regret.

“I think, help! Imagine if we had had more of these children!” Campbell says, adding, “My greatest impact is through my children. The more children I have, the more ability I have to impact the world for God.”

A Christian God, that is. Campbell says if believers don’t starting reproducing in large numbers, biblical Christianity will lose its voice.

“We look across the Islamic world and we see that they are outnumbering us in their family size, and they are in many places and many countries taking over those nations, without a jihad, just by multiplication,” Campbell says.

This troubles me greatly. It’s a natalist movement that uses Christianity as a backdrop. Ick.

Facade's avatar

I’m sure Atheists, Buddhists, etc. have children in hopes of bringing more of them into the world.

aphilotus's avatar

Apparently their 18th was born… December 18th last year. That’s, what, a twelve day gap between birth and re-pregnancy.

They work fast.

eponymoushipster's avatar

@aphilotus nothing says romance like a new baby…~

aprilsimnel's avatar

@Facade – But do they? I have never heard of an atheist or Buddhist going on record with a plan to have their co-religionists (or co-nonreligionists) bear multitudes of children in order to fend off believers of other faiths. That’s all I have to say about this.

As for the Duggars themselves, I neither begrudge or envy their lives.

Facade's avatar

@aprilsimnel I haven’t seen a show featuring Atheists, so I can’t answer that one for you.

SheWasAll_'s avatar

@photographcrash EXACTLY. Someone once told me I was being selfish because I don’t want to have any kids. He exact words were “How can you keep the miracle of life all to yourself and not share it with the world?” I think families like the Duggars are selfish, by building up a large family while other children can be born addicted to cocaine, can be subjected to daily abuse (physical, emotional, and even sexual) and can live in deplorable conditions and all those poor children want is a safe home and a loving family.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

Wow. that’s first. I watch the show, I can’t not, seriously…it’s crazy…I don’t know how they do it, I can’t imagine they can, like @BBSDTfamily said, nurture each kid’s individuality so if some of them have a personality, we’re all lucky…I’ve seen them take the kids to the creationism museum and rolled my eyes…all the more people growing up with fiction instead of fact…and every time we watch the show, I look at my partner and we say ‘we’re not reproducing fast enough to counteract’...I also hope that not all their children are their parents’ clones…in many ways, they’re such caricatures…I’m sure reality is not how it’s portrayed on TV

casheroo's avatar

@SheWasAll_ It’s not the Duggars responsibility to adopt and care for any child that is neglected or born addicted to cocaine.

MissAusten's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir The creation museum?! I so want to go there, but I’m afraid I’d get kicked out. :(

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@MissAusten nah, I’d be too angry

Facade's avatar

@casheroo Exactly what I was thinking.

MissAusten's avatar

Have you read “The Year of Living Biblically?” The part about the Creation Museum is awesome. That kind of thing doesn’t actually make me mad, it just turns me into an eye-rolling sarcasm machine.

rooeytoo's avatar

@MissAusten – I love that “eye rolling sarcasm machine!” I think I might be one of those as well.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@rooeytoo word, we should make that a Halloween costume

nayeight's avatar

Those people are crazy. There is no way in hell I would haver consider having 19 children. 19! What the hell? It’s 2009 not 1809! Even then I’m sure 19 was still a shit load of kids. I think it’s irresponsible, there’s already too many damn people on this planet. Now their 19 kids will probably pop out little bastards of their own when they grow up. Imagine if those 19 kids have 19 kids each. That’s 361 kids who will grow up to have kids of their own. Even if they only have 1 or 2 kids thats still an extra 361–722 people. Tthats NOT okay. There is such a thing as too many mother fuckin kids and thats what they have going on right now…

SheWasAll_'s avatar

@casheroo I never said it’s their responsibility. I’m just pointing out that what they’re doing I PERSONALLY find selfish because there are children out there who need families, not that they should adopt those needy children.

Randy's avatar

Hey, the Duggars never have to pay taxes again. That’s for sure.

Buttonstc's avatar

Well, if you want to take that line of judgmentalism one could also say that it was extremely selfish of the Roloff family (Little People Big World) to have children of their own rather than adopting some of the perfectly healthy children needing homes. After all since they both were dwarfs there was a 50% chance with each conception that there children would have dwarfism.

Where does it end. Someone else was lamenting how the Duggar children caring for the younger siblings were being deprived of a childhood. Well, guess what? Every older sibling in a dysfunctional alcoholic household is also being deprived of a childhood and in addition to their siblings they have to be a parent to their own parent. And most of them manage to grow into sensible functional adults.

Heck I would have traded places with any Duggar kid any day of the week. And I’m pretty sure there are a whole mess of kids growing up in that kind of chaos who would feel likewise.

However many of them there are they are happy and functional and the parents appear to have their best interests at heart.

It really amazes me how many usually liberal seemingly open minded folks are willing to toss all those ideas out the window to criticize this family who isn’t taking a penny from anyone, living debt free, built their own house etc. Just because their choice is different from yours or the majority. Wow

And they are not even suggesting that anyone else should do what they are doing. They are just living their lives.

As I mentioned, their choice regarding kids certainly isn’t mine but I don’t feel that gives me the right to judge their methods or motives or feel that I or anyone else has a right to judge their procreation. I’m glad that this is the US and not China where the government controls family size.

Facade's avatar

applause

DrasticDreamer's avatar

@Buttonstc I’m not glad that family size isn’t controlled. Life might be okay for people right now, but if people like that continue to have 19 kids, it won’t be. Their own children and grandchildren are going to be effected, to a big degree, by overpopulation. If people continue to have that many kids, quality of life – for everyone – is going to drop severely.

We’re not talking about people’s yards and houses being crammed together with nothing more than three feet of separation. We’re not talking about people being packed like sardines on subway trains. We aren’t talking about waiting in traffic for three hours after you get off work to get home.

What we are talking about is food shortage, disease, increased pollution like we’ve never seen before, animals going extinct in large numbers because their habitat is destroyed to maintain our current way of life. Polluted water, overcrowded prisons and hospitals. It doesn’t end. Yeah… That’s the kind of world parents should want their kids living in…

You can say people here are judgmental for looking down on adults that choose to have that many kids, but I think you’re completely wrong. I look down on them because I consider the quality of life for people now and in the future – not just the quality of life for my own flesh and blood. Even looking at it from their own perspective, they’re going against the very thing they’re trying to do – which is populate the earth with their own kind. By doing that very thing, they’re going to make it impossible for anyone to populate the earth, because we will run out of resources.

Buttonstc's avatar

So, how would you implement this controlling of family size?

Should it be the government’s responsibility? What method would you use to insure compliance?

Buttonstc's avatar

BTW there was a bit of discussion upthread about groups who use population increase to further their political/religious agenda with the observation that there weren’t any other groups who do this.

Actually that’s what the Palestinians are doing in order to outnumber the Jews this controlling things by sheer numbers. They are multiplying like rabbits and this in spite of already living in crowded conditions with limited resources. But it’s not P.C. to speak critically of them now is it?? Is anybody calling them nuts? I have yet to hear that.

Shhhh the PC police may be lurking about.

DrasticDreamer's avatar

@Buttonstc Yes, the government. I’d rather have them step in to control something like that rather than have human beings completely destroy themselves simply because they want to have ten or more children.

No one has brought up people from other countries doing the same thing as the Duggars because this thread is specifically about the Duggars. Do you seriously think that the people who oppose the Duggars having so many children wouldn’t also oppose anyone else doing the exact same thing? If so, I think you’re sadly mistaken.

No one, anywhere, for any reason – given the current population size – should have that many children. Not unless they’re content destroying the world and the lives of those who already exist.

JLeslie's avatar

If they are able to care for all of those kids then I do not negatively judge them, it is their life, their choice, but I wish it wasn’t on tv. Most people probably cannot support and raise 19 children well, and I don’t like that our media makes this into attention getting news stories or tv shows. The tv shows bother me most, because it provides a false sense of how much work, and what it is really like to raise so many children.

Also, from a sociological point of view it seems to me that the most successful and prosperous societies in the world today are ones that control birth rates and population. I don’t mean government control, but individual control over their own fertility. Promoting extra large families (I am talking about extremes, more than 6 children) as a wonderful, Godly thing is not helpful to society in general in my opinion.

elijah's avatar

I’m not sure what I feel, on one hand I think they are crazy and a bit selfish to keep having children. Like others have said-the older children are being forced to become caretakers. The children don’t really have the freedom to develop an identity. They are just part of a crazy bible cult (I’m sorry but I can’t call it anything else) that wants an army of followers.
On the other hand, this family obviously loves each other, the kids seem happy (since they don’t know any other type of childhood) they are respectful, kind, and caring. The mother loves being a stay at home mom, she doesn’t pop ‘em out and stick ‘em in daycare while she chases after a career.
I guess what I’m saying is that I don’t agree with some of the things their religion preaches, I do agree with their right to believe. There are children in much worse condition than the Duggar children. There are negative aspects to being in such a large family, but it’s worse to be a lonely child left home alone most of the time while his parents are too busy for him.

casheroo's avatar

I just think it’s flawed to say overpopulation is because people are having too many children, when we all know that nowadays having more than three is pretty rare….The overpopulation problem is because we’re living much longer than our ancestors did, science has made that possible. Our ancestors would have many many children, even just going back to my grandmothers age where having 8 was actually a small family. I think one family having many children is not going to cause the end of the world…but keeping everyone alive well into their 80s and 90s when that usually wouldn’t have happened is where the issue lies. This is my own opinion though.

markyy's avatar

@Buttonstc, @DrasticDreamer The government will never do anything to stop this kind of thing. Maybe I’m a bit stuck in my US equals Bush mindset but conservative and christian government would force a minimum amount of children rather than a maximum.

This is an extreme example. There are plenty of families like this and size is irrelevant The danger is not in their numbers, it’s in their intentions to have these children. It is their desperate attempt of fighting back to a world with no place for their god. A way to increase the size of their cult. What I find incredible about this family is how much media attention they get. Sure they have 18 kids, but 8 of those children will be brought up with the mindset of the 1950’s,—or rather the 1800’s—-. Eight of those kids grow up inferior to the other ten. For that alone I can only hope their 19th child will be their last, and a boy.

Maybe I was naive to think that Americans would grow tired with people that are stuck in their beliefs as opposed to watch their every move on tv. I don’t know how I can be that naive after John and Kate +8.

@elijah Thanks for finding the right words. It is a crazy bible cult.

markyy's avatar

And what about these claims that they will not take any money from others? Most of us have children that need to go to college. Imagine having to put up the money x 18 for that. But, fortunately for them, their religion prevents them from that lifestyle.

tinyfaery's avatar

Hurry. Everyone breed. Afterall, it’s your right. Maybe we can breed the world to destruction and then we no longer have to worry about
who is breeding and what they are teaching their kids.

SundayKittens's avatar

At first I thought it was so irresponsible, considering how overpopulated this world is. But after teaching for a few years I am in support of them…Religious/political views aside (don’t get me started), these kids are good, well-behaved, responsible kids. So most likely they will be as adults and will raise their offspring that way…and THAT is what this country NEEEEDDSSSS.
Seeing the lack of respect and parental involvement in my students really concerns me, and I don’t see that in this family. I’d much rather them have 19 kids and be able to care for them than someone doing it for the check.

SundayKittens's avatar

….adoption issue brings up a good point, though. Good thinking….

ShanEnri's avatar

If they can support so many financially, emotionally and physically then more power to them!

Darwin's avatar

For all those who defend folks having had large families in the old days, be aware that often many or most of those kids would never make it to adulthood. Since there were no antibiotics, no neonatal intensive care units, no vaccinations against various diseases, and no governmental body to insist that kids not do dangerous work, or that certain safety precautions need to be observed, a lot of the kids that were born just never didn’t survive.

And for those who say it isn’t the Duggars responsibility to adopt children born addicted or neglected, it may not be, but it certainly isn’t very “Christian” of them. Througout the bible, there are stories and examples of how Jesus loved and protected children. He told us to take care of His lambs. If the Duggars were true to the teachings of Jesus then they would adopt and then lead those children in the way of Jesus, too.

Facade's avatar

@Darwin It is ridiculous to put that responsibility on people. Who are you to decide what’s “Christian” and what’s not?

Darwin's avatar

I am twitting everyone who says caring for your fellow man isn’t your responsibility if you are a follower of Jesus.

Who is anybody to decide what is “Christian” and what is not? That is part of the problem the Christian church faces, in that various members of it keep drawing lines in the sand. If you step over the line you aren’t a “Christian” and so will “burn in Hell.” The Duggars present themselves as Christian, but like most “Christians” they pick and choose what they want to believe.

DrasticDreamer's avatar

To whoever said overpopulation isn’t caused by people having that many kids: You’re wrong. Overpopulation is caused by a) people having that many children and b) people living so long. The Duggars are contributing to the problem no matter what you choose to believe.

casheroo's avatar

@DrasticDreamer Check out the wiki aritcle on overpopulation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation I found the projections for 2050 pretty interesting. like” In 2000–2005, the average world fertility was 2.65 children per woman, about half the level in 1950–1955 (5 children per woman). In the medium variant, global fertility is projected to decline further to 2.05 children per woman.
and World population is currently growing by approximately 74 million people per year. If current fertility rates continued, in 2050 the total world population would be 11 billion, with 169 million people added each year. However, global fertility rates have been falling for decades, and the updated United Nations figures project that the world population will reach 9.2 billion around 2050.[6][7] This is the medium variant figure which assumes a decrease in average fertility from the present level of 2.5 down to 2
I think putting all the blame on people having children is ridiculous. It’s as if people want others to just stop having children and just adopt, which would seem like it’d actually destroy the world and not help it.

tinyfaery's avatar

The population is decreasing. That’s a good thing.

JLeslie's avatar

Just to introduce another twist to the discussion on population growth; many societies, including America rely somewhat on a decent birth rate to support the aging population. Part of social security and Medicare is not only people have paid in, but also that there are younger people paying in, helping to supprt the older people. Many European countries are nervous about their very low birth rates, which is part of the reason the governments pay for extensive maternity leave to encourage people to have babies. I do agree that births and longer life expectancy both influence population. But, I am not very worried about overpopulation. The Duggar’s are an extreme example.

bea2345's avatar

As the fourth of five children, I wonder what it must be like to be one of the younger Duggars.

SuperMouse's avatar

@bea2345 if they are anything like the youngest in my family (I’m four of six), spoiled! Sorry Gimme, you know I love you!!

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

we’re all guilty of something in terms of the environment
maybe you’re not contributing to overpopulation, but you are probably contributing to pollution or supporting companies releasing toxins and kill off animals or you’re a meat eater or whatever…to judge these people…well judge yourself first…

akmcg's avatar

I think it is rude to take up that many resources when it is completely unneccessary. Take, take, take. It’s not only about the financial stability of having that many kids that matters – it’s about the continued flawed thinking process of the “entitled” that grosses me out. BUT, I am pro-choice, so I guess I have to support the whole gambit, eh? This is a what choice and freedom is all about….just glad it ain’t my problem! BTW- I don’t have a TV so I have no idea who these people are.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Fact from fiction, truth from diction. @Astrochuck ” What kind of woman would want to do that to her body anyway?” What kind of woman would have 2 to 5 abortions because she would rather look good for Spring break, not want to give up boozing in the club, or miss a promotion at work? No one says anything of selfish women like that. And from following your comments and questions and such I feel you to be an upright guy but ” Eighteen kids aren’t enough for these hicks?” is kind of harsh along with “rednecks”. I mean even I would not try that. Hate what they do, but lets not hate people :-D

I guess I must be one of the few on the planet who never heard of them (of have and forgot) but I say if they can support and love the kids and she can stay healthy doing so what is the big deal? We lionize women who want to “have it all” and not suffer the consequences of their boinking around by killing off the lives they are creating. Everyone wants to jump the soap box and say “Good for them, control your destiny”, maybe the Duggars are in some way making up for them. There would not be anything to comment on of people focused on bigger things in life as I had, maybe why I never had time to dwell on the fact that she wanted (intentionally or not) to be a real life Mother Hubbard.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I do too judge those women as well (not because I think abortion is wrong but because they should be more responsible) and it is not the Duggars’ place to replace the kids I ‘lost’.

bea2345's avatar

When I hear about these large families I wonder how the children manage, especially the ones in the middle. When I was growing up, I occasionally had the feeling that 3 brothers was too many. And they were all older than me.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir ”it is not the Duggars’ place to replace the kids I ‘lost’.” I don’t think they are trying to specifically replace every child aborted I think they are just trying to be “fruitful and multiply”. People say the universe has a way of balancing itself out and they seem to be part of that (if it exist) by choice or unintended.

ruth4532's avatar

i agree with you and i hate the duggars

ruth4532's avatar

i think the duggars are nuts and sick i hope that they stop having children

Aethelwine's avatar

@ruth4532 Hate is such a strong word for someone you don’t know personally. They could be the kindest family you ever met.

ruth4532's avatar

i got one child

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther