Sunday, March 18th, 2007 - 1:06am
21 comments - Leave a comment
The Duggars bother me, and here is why:
While it’s none of my business that this woman chooses to earn a place in the guiness book of world records for the number of successful pregnancies, I still feel strongly that she needs her tubes tied, or her uterus to fall out, or something.
I’m sorry, but there is no way that two parents can provide adequate attention and affection to seventeen children. And isolating all of the children – the girls especially – and turning the older children into live in housekeepers and babysitters? Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Ugh…
(0)
Ahh yes, I’ve heard of that family before. It’s insane, in my opinion.
I feel bad for those kids!! The mom sure could use a updated hair cut. If they are the people who have been on TLC.
I totally agree with you. Joe and I were watching a show about these people the other day and all we could say was:
“*blink blink*”
Sometimes I think involuntary sterilization isn’t such a bad idea. At least in cases like this.
And have you seen how she homeschools her kids? It’s like a classroom. Dinnertime is like a cafeteria setting. It’s just…weird.
I had to google them to make sure they are the ones that I thought they were. Yep. They irk me. I watched them on TLC because they were adjacent to Miami Ink a long time ago. Strange. I mean I’m all for having a family and being happy but you know I kept asking myself exactly how they get all that money to pay for all that lavish stuff they have? Exactly why did you build a house with 42 bedrooms and all your girls sleep in the same room and all boys are in the same room?
Why home school them? I don’t get that. I get that you want to teach them about religion I really do, but how about sending them out into the real world for a while and then when they get home from school you can have bible class?
Jen | 03.18.07 at 1:06am | link to comment
I feel bad for those kids!! The mom sure could use a updated hair cut. If they are the people who have been on TLC.
I almost fell over laughing when I read you comment. I think they are Mormon and in that case she has the updated hair do. I’m sorry if I offend any Mormons but I don’t know it’s just very weird to me. Even weirder than say a Muslim or a Buddhist. I can’t see living like I’m in the stone ages then completely contradicting myself with a multi million dollar home.
Yeah it bothers me too. And what bothers me even more is that they’ll probably get all these donations and such because of their extra large family while people who have two or three kids and would really like donations and were smart enough to stop procrating when their finances said so, get nothing. Ugh is right.
Cute new theme, by the way!
You know, it doesn’t bother me at all. Why? Because this is the road they have chosen based on strong beliefs. Unlike many, they follow through on their beliefs. These folks are well able to provide for this large family, and keep in mind that as the older ones grow up they will move out on their own and start their own lives. They didn’t have 17 children all at once, after all. The fact is, there is no error in having older siblings participate in the care of younger ones. It creates a less selfish child and one that understand the responsibility connected with family life.
They homeschool because a “Bible class” for even an hour a day can’t compete with the Godless public school system that feeds the child’s mind for 7 hours a day. Then the child goes home and is subjected to 2 hours or more of homework from the same system that had him all day already. See the imbalance?
What’s smart about limiting the family size anyway? That’s a throwback to the false allegations in the 60s and 70s by the zero population growth people. The plain fact is, smaller families in the past 40 years has actually caused all of us to pay higher taxes in all areas. Fewer people translates to a much smaller tax base and that means individually we all pay a higher price. We’ve committed economical suicide in this regard.
Maybe some of you just love paying high income tax, FICA, Medicare, and local taxes, but I don’t and I’m sick to death of everyone pointing to a family like this as if it’s wrong. We should be pointing at ourselves, understanding that we are overburdening our own children when we reach retirement age. Where once there were 43 people to support one retired person, now it’s down to only 3.1. Where are the other 40? Never born. That’s why a family with only 2 or 3 children is in such financial dire straits. It’s even why public schools don’t have all the funding they need – fewer and fewer children. Could we have shot ourselves in the foot with any better aim? I doubt it.
The Duggars have committed no crime to be so severely thrashed out by the public. They are unusual in some respects, but they aren’t the only large family in the country. Keep your eyes open. And your minds. The smarter people get the more they realize that large families are producing the taxpayers of the future.
I agree… The thing that I hate the most is the fact that the kids (and the teenagers) probably know nothing of what the ‘real world’ is like. The isolation they have experienced their whole life is, in my opinion, only going to hurt them in the future. Yeah parents want to protect their children from the ‘evil in this world’ but there is only so much they can do.
My second cousin and his wife have 13 kids. They are mormon, and all their kids are homeschooled. I would hate to see people judging them by the size of their family or religion. They’re all great people and the bond they have with each other is amazing. All their children get to experience everything any other kid does, except going to school.
Although, I don’t know much about this family but having children just to set a record is definitely wrong.
I have see the duggars, and I’m not going to lie, I am facinated with their family, lifestyle, and ways of accomplishing things.
But I can see where you are comming from on terms of careing for each of the children and being able to equally distribute affection to each of them. I think its nice that they are such a working team .. but thats mainly just it; the kids have been programed to work as a team to accomplish everyday tasks.
Ann, your arguments are all well and good, but I noticed that you didn’t touch on the fact that two people cannot adequately show love and affection to seventeen children. There just aren’t enough hands on a person and hours in a day.
Also, I encourage families and children to work together and help one another out. But there’s a difference between, say, a designated chore one or two days a week and being assigned a child to look after 24/7.
I think its neat, but I think its time to get her tube tied.
Perhaps I’m the odd one out here. And that’s fine. But I honestly, truly feel that I would be doing my children a major disservice if I were to have child after child after child. Children are a gift, yes, that is true, but that does not mean that you need two dozen of them. Or even a dozen.
I believe it is better to devote 100% to a number of children that is manageable. Three, four, five, maybe six, tops. When you start having more than that, you don’t have enough hands, enough hours in a day, enough patience, enough energy. It would be impossible.
And no way, no how would I ever “appoint” my child as a child-parent to a younger child. There is a huge difference between assigning a child a designated chore – such as scooping the litter box every two days, or taking out a bag of garbage every Wednesday night and giving the child the care of a younger child. I’m sorry, but older children are meant to be your children, not your little helpers and caretakers whenever they’re not sleeping or doing their own studies.
Ann | 03.18.07 at 1:06am | link to comment
You know, it doesn’t bother me at all. Why? Because this is the road they have chosen based on strong beliefs. Unlike many, they follow through on their beliefs. These folks are well able to provide for this large family, and keep in mind that as the older ones grow up they will move out on their own and start their own lives. They didn’t have 17 children all at once, after all. The fact is, there is no error in having older siblings participate in the care of younger ones. It creates a less selfish child and one that understand the responsibility connected with family life.
They homeschool because a “Bible class†for even an hour a day can’t compete with the Godless public school system that feeds the child’s mind for 7 hours a day. Then the child goes home and is subjected to 2 hours or more of homework from the same system that had him all day already. See the imbalance?
What’s smart about limiting the family size anyway? That’s a throwback to the false allegations in the 60s and 70s by the zero population growth people. The plain fact is, smaller families in the past 40 years has actually caused all of us to pay higher taxes in all areas. Fewer people translates to a much smaller tax base and that means individually we all pay a higher price. We’ve committed economical suicide in this regard.
Maybe some of you just love paying high income tax, FICA, Medicare, and local taxes, but I don’t and I’m sick to death of everyone pointing to a family like this as if it’s wrong. We should be pointing at ourselves, understanding that we are overburdening our own children when we reach retirement age. Where once there were 43 people to support one retired person, now it’s down to only 3.1. Where are the other 40? Never born. That’s why a family with only 2 or 3 children is in such financial dire straits. It’s even why public schools don’t have all the funding they need – fewer and fewer children. Could we have shot ourselves in the foot with any better aim? I doubt it.
The Duggars have committed no crime to be so severely thrashed out by the public. They are unusual in some respects, but they aren’t the only large family in the country. Keep your eyes open. And your minds. The smarter people get the more they realize that large families are producing the taxpayers of the future.
Ann I hope you didn’t think my comment was against big families. I’d love to have a large family. Your arguments are valid because they are what you think, but we have strongly differing views on the whole religious school thing.
I don’t see it that way. I want my child exposed to as many people, religions, cultures, as she can be. I was and it made me a non prejudice person who is accepting of different races, religions, and anything but just stupid people.
So for me it’s not the fact that they have so many kids it’s really the alienation that I feel the whole religion has going on.
Allison | 03.18.07 at 1:06am | link to comment
My second cousin and his wife have 13 kids. They are mormon, and all their kids are homeschooled. I would hate to see people judging them by the size of their family or religion. They’re all great people and the bond they have with each other is amazing. All their children get to experience everything any other kid does, except going to school.
Although, I don’t know much about this family but having children just to set a record is definitely wrong.
I have a friend and a mentor who has around 18 children in total. Now mind you she has given birth, adopted and the like. She’s also in her 50′s and has kids ranging from 6 to 30. She’s just a woman who wants to help children. She home schools, but she gets into all these home school activities that allow the children play time with others, field trips, and has them in sports in leagues. I think there is a difference between that and a family who let their dead beat kid drop out of 8th grade and pretend to be home schooled while running the streets. Or a family that is only teaching religion or say math in a religious context. For some reason that just bugs me.
Since I don’t live in the USA, I didn’t know anything about the Duggars. I searched on Yahoo, and found their official site.
I have nothing against big families. But 17 children is far too many. I’ve read on the official site’s FAQ how she managed to organize her family life, and it really scared me. I think with 17 children you can’t be a real motherly model for your children, because you just don’t have time to take each one of them individually and actually talk. Children need to express their feelings. In this case, the only person they can express their feelings to is an older sister or brother. I don’t think it gives a good perspective on motherhood.
I have no idea who that is, but from what I’ve read it reminds me of a girl that I went to school with. Her mum as about 11/12 children now (all under the age of 20) and they live in a 5 bedroom house. The mother doesn’t work, aside from writing children’s books, and lives on benefits and income from the father’s job.
Some of the children are ill, at least one is autistic, and I just feel that after 6 or 7 she should have been sterilized. It’s no way for these children to grow up, sharing bedrooms all their life and practically living on the bread line (from an outsiders point of view) just because the mother likes being pregnant and having children around. Dude, open a day care in your home or something!
My Opa was one of the youngest of 9 children. But that was back in the early 1930s-40s and he lived and worked on a farm for along time. I don’t know how anyone these days could afford 17 children.
My Opas parents had a farm etc to support their family and that was durring the depression in Holland.
I say if you don’t feed, clothe or babysit them it is none of your or my business if they have 34 children. What is the deal with trying to say they have 17 children because they are Mormon. If they were Baptist and had 17 children would it still be a problem. On to the chores, have you ever worked a public job with a teenager that did not know how to carry their weight?? This is because of lack of responsibility at home. Those of you speaking of chores only 2 days a week, what is going to happen when the child leaves home, will they think they can only work 2 days a week and it will be okay. Home schooling!! Praise be to the parent that does. I went to a boy scout function last night, 3 of the fellows had reading parts and they sounded like kindergarten children trying to read. We as a people have no right to say this woman or man should be sterilized. I grew up doing my fair share of what had to be done whether in the house or out on the farm and it didn’t hurt me. Are some of you maybe jealous of the nice house they have and it is my understanding they did quite a bit of the work themselves. I have read afford many times in the above comments, children do not have to wear Tommy or Calvin or Liz or Oshgosh clothing. Neither do they have to have the very best cut of meat every day to have a balanced diet. As far as loving and caring for the children, does your 7 or 8 yro need as much attention and care as your 6 mo or 2 yro. They have chosen this as their lifestyle so let them be unless something good can be said about or for them.
I can see why she homeschools and “shelters” her children from the real world. What mother doesn’t want to protect their child from what is out there. It’s bad enough that they’ll have to live in it when they grow up. Why not let them have a happy childhood while they can? My mother didn’t watch alot of t.v. when I was growing up. I think the majority of the time it was on cartoons or videotapes of cartoons. And as far as a “child-buddy” goes..if you really think about it children learn from older siblings. Alyssa will eventually be ‘responsible’ for Ryan when they’re both in school, seeing as how they are close together in age. They will keep each other out of trouble (hopefully) and I’m sure even now Alyssa is teaching Ryan the ropes of the road without being told. I think it’s in our nature to look after each other in the ‘pack’ and just because she has assigned one of the older kids another younger kid to look after doesn’t mean that she’s neglectful of the younger kid’s needs. She’s just managed to keep her family in balance. Not saying that I would go out and have 17 kids, but it’s interesting to see someone attempt it in this day and age. And she doesn’t keep those kids all inside all the time they do have interaction with other home schooled kids and go places etc.
Jenn | 03.18.07 at 1:06am | link to comment
I believe it is better to devote 100% to a number of children that is manageable. Three, four, five, maybe six, tops. When you start having more than that, you don’t have enough hands, enough hours in a day, enough patience, enough energy. It would be impossible.
If you can have two children, and multiply your love to the two of them, who’s to say the Duggar mom can’t multiply her love 16 times over, and still have the time, energy, and patience to make it work? She’s not doing it alone, and yes, she does rely on her eldest children quite a bit, but it’s just like if a woman had 3 children who were older, and 3 children who were quite a few years younger, the older ones would look out for the younger, just like in a family with 2 children. My sister might not have been my “child-parent” but she was 8 years older than me, and she helped my mom take care of me.
And homeschooling is such a wide-spread thing now… public schools, and even private ones are really hard to deal with for a lot of kids, and finding a good school, without the threat of guns and gangs, etc. is almost impossible to find.
I think the Duggars are a model family, really. They make do with what they have, and from the looks of it, not one of those kids complains about their situation. (And as to how they make due with their resources, they shop at Aldi’s and Good Will, both of which are stores where you get the most for your money.)