This is what I was going to add to the other thread about the Duggers, but it is now closed.

They have a litter.

If each of their 17 follows in their parents footsteps, (and after years of brainwashing the chances are very good they will), the Duggers will have 289 grandchildren, (can you even imagine this?). If each of those follows in their grandparents footsteps the Duggers will have 4913 great grandchildren. The third generation will contain 83521 great great grands and the fourth generation will populate a large sized city with 1,419857 great great great grands.

Now tell me that doesn't have an impact on everyone else.

Following exponential math, the world will be entirely inhabited by Joe Bob's descendants in 2248

YIKES! Those are some amazing numbers. It will be interesting to see if the kids have large families or not.

I am very concerned about their family over-populating. I don't think that *they* are concerned though! Like nightowlrn mentioned, their offspring will soon take over the world! LOL.

Why does this bother some of you so much? It's NONE of your business!! Gosh! It's like beating a dead horse!

Mom2twins2, I don't think it necessarily "bothers" any of the above posters. But it does bring up so many interesting parenting/family issues.

I wanted to post on the last thread regarding this issue, but it closed too soon.

I think what would be most interesting would be to hear how the Dugger family children like being a part of the family they've got.

Despite some of the strong opinions about how horrible family life must be for the Duggers (as seen in the now closed thread on the topic), I'm willing to bet this:

Given the choice between being one of 17 children in this family with plenty of chores and a stay-at-home-mom who interacts with them, teaches them to play musical instruments, and loves them ALL DAY, or a very small family with 2 working out of the home parents and a paid care-giver, I think the Dugger children would choose what they've already got. And I sure would, too!

If someone thinks that a mom can't care for 17 children, I hope those same people have at LEAST that much faith in their school teachers, who are providing a nurturing, caring, hands-on, safe envirmonment for kids on all levels all the time, every day. Oh, and we expect them to teach, too.

Having extremely large families might be very atypical in current day's society, but that doesn't make it wrong. Anyone wishing to judge such situations has to be ready to be judged, also.

Does any parent *really* feel like their family style is the only right one?

Given our dwindling natural resources, in my mind, there is an element of irresponsibility in procreating to the extreme....that's my rub about this. It has nothing to do with whether the family can raise their children well or not in the large family, just that we can't have too many families with quivers this full.

cj/

I know it's nowhere close to 17, but my best friend has 7 kids. One is married with 2 of his own and obviously doesn't live in the house. But there is a 19 yo who is fully capable of being out on his own, but chooses to still live in the home. They were on vacation this summer and he had to stay home and work. He was miserable without his siblings. My point is that I doubt that the Duggar children dislike their sitution. And if they did have to be without the family for whatever reason, would soon realize how much they missed it.

And.... why the "brainwashing" comment??? Don't we all brainwash our kids to the extent that we raise them to have the same values as we do?

I've posted before that my best friends have 9 kids!!! 18, 16, 14, 11, 10, 8, 6, 3, and 1!! They live in a tiny house, all but the baby and two oldest share beds. It's the HAPPIEST home I have been in. I go there to nourish myself emotionally!! I think about my childless sister and her husband running around in their gigantic home with totally landscaped yard, 3 car garage, two cars and all I think about is where are the pitter patter of little footsteps? I'll take the poor/9 kids lifestyle anyday! They home school too!! The oldest just took her college entrance exams and she did very well. Next year she will be off to a private college in California! Seriously, I don't know ANY happier people! Even my teenage son likes to go be around them. THAT's amazing!!! lol So don't judge what you don't know! (And I'm not judging my sister, if she's happy that's fine.)

What makes you think it bothers anyone? Someone brought the subject up and not everyone got on the Duggar , super uterus, band wagon, but it certainly doesn't mean it bothers anyone. While some find it oddly amusing, or show concern for the childhood experiences the kids are or are not getting, no one has said only children or children from smaller families are immune from some of the negatives in their surroundings.

Personally, I could care less other than the fact they are raising a herd of mini-me's and are parading them around the country and on television. i suppose it brings in the cash.

Did anyone see their line of bathing suits?

exactly what i've wanted to say! well said cj!

CJ, you really did say this very well. You have spoken my main concern about this choice that they have made.

You mean people REALLY believe in the "junk science" that our natural resources are dwindling. I have not read anything that has absoulte concrete proof that would make me believe that is true.

You're kidding, right?

Yeah, I'm speechless....a rare thing.

I am not kidding...the research is out that to the opposite. The earth is not in dire danger of using up all our resources.
Please do some research on your own..do not believe everything that others try to tell you. People (especially companies) try to get you to buy into this way of thinking to make money off of you. Do the research ..it may open up your eyes.

Luckily, I don't think the Dugger family is starting a trend. In fact, there's an increasingly popular movement for couples these days to be "childless by choice." So 17+ children that are wanted and loved in one family probably won't impact our lives or our world very much.

But your point is well-made. I can respect the opinion of anyone who looks at the issue out of concern for the impact of such large families on our planet.

Would you care to share some links for the research that backs up this idea?

Here is one that I had bookmarked..read the entire page it does offer other points of insight.
The Growing Abundance of Natural Resources presented at 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development

The one quote that is at the end helps.
As noted by Nobel laureate Friedrich Hayek, "Industrial development would have been greatly retarded if sixty or eighty years ago the warning of the conservationists about the threatened exhaustion of the supply of coal had been heeded; and the internal combustion engine would never have revolutionized transport if its use had been limited to the known supplies of oil ... though it is important that on all these matters the opinion of the experts about the physical facts should be heard, the result in most instances would have been very detrimental if they had had the power to enforce their views on policy." Friedrich Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty

I'm with you!! There's also plenty of food to feed the world, it's all greed and politic if there are food shortages.

Well, this is certainly an eye-opening threat. It's interesting to see what people believe.

The original comment was the number of offspring. When my grandmother was having children over 80 years ago, many women lost children in childbirth or to disease. My grandmother lost one child to my knowledge, but had 12 grown to adulthood. Those 12 had anywhere from 6 to 14 children. I am not sure of the count but one cousin said we had 90 cousins. When my grandmother died at 85, she had 25 great grandchildren. Although it is unusual to have large families now a days, it still happens. My cousin adopted 6 children and had one of her own.

Thanks for posting that link. I haven't read it thoroughly yet, but I did do a quick skim. Very interesting.

I have never worried much about minerals. Oil is a problem, only because of our stupid insistance on being independant of foreign oil. I have always been of the opinion that we use everyone elses oil and leave ours where it is. Here is a quote from your paper, "Moreover, the needs of future generations are fully considered in the pricing mechanism. An asset's value is determined by the projected value of its future returns. Resource owners are thus fully encouraged to consider the long-term implications of management decisions." I think this statement is false as far as the oil producers go. If they were considering long-term implications, we would be buying all our oil from overseas and conserving what we have left. Right now the world is relatively peaceful and we can get our oil easily from outside the country. If WWIII were to start, we would be up a creek since we have squandered our own oilfields. Eventually science will come up with something to replace oil.

Air can be a problem and is in a lot of areas and will continue to be as China industrializes further.

Forestry may not be a problem here, but it could prove to be for the rain forests. I didn't see rain forests mentioned in that paper. And as far as forests go, the reason we have so many forests in this country right now is because we are not allowing nearly as much harvesting as we use to. We are importing much of our lumber from Cananda and other places.

I do have some concerns about water. Without that, there is nothing. Much of our fresh water is contained in the melting ice of the polar ice caps. When that melts, it runs into the saline oceans. At this point de-salinization is too costly and probably not practical for landlocked areas that are too far from ocean water. Lack of water, clean or otherwise, is one of the major problems in Africa. There is not a lot of water in Asia either. A lot of our water is going to grow those crops to feed all those people or to run factories, both of which give us back water that is contaminated.

There is no mention of ecosystems in the paper. We really don't know what harm is being done by destroying or diverting certain ecosystems.

Anyway, thanks again for posting the link. We have gotten totally off topic, but that's okay with me.

Off topic here.....

We tell my 13 year old that we're going to get her one of the Duggar "swim dresses." She's having a fit because I want to have #4 (uh, like she has any say in it to begin with ). So I tease her that she'll end up having 17 kids like the Duggars. <sigh>

__________________
Amy
Mom to Lauren, Eryn, Naysa
and announcing......
Gavin Michael Chase, 9 lbs 10 ozs
and 21 3/4 inches long on 10/13/09!

Overpopulation is a problem and resources are finite. The size of this family bothers me a lot because I cannot see it as anything but irresposible for one family to consume so many resources.

Oh GOODY! There's plenty of food, but will we be able to take the oxygen masks off long enough to eat it? (Look around at the rate of pollution, the destruction of rain forests, etc. Our air is becoming nasty because of so much industrialization and destruction of the plants/trees/forests that help clean the air).

And will, we have any good, clean drinking water to wash all the food down with? Have you taken a look at the rivers, streams, polar ice caps, etc? They too are disappearing. And what is not disappearing is becoming terribly polluted.

Resources are finite. There is an end to all natural resources.

Now, granted we humans, may have the knowledge and the ability to create replacements for the natural resources but that takes time, money and hard work. I don't even consider the whole global warming argument in my thoughts. It's about resources and if we don't wake up and come to the realization that we are spending (resource wise) than we are making we will be broke!

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

Back to the orginial..about the Duggers

Every family has there own "system" that their households runs on. Some people stay at home, others both parents work, some kids have chores, others don't, some give their kids allowances, other's don't, some homeschool, some public education ..the possibiles are endless. What works great for one family would not work for other families.
That is what makes every family special. We live in America ...with freedom and choices and yet others always are seeking to find fault with the choices people make. Maybe this type of family is not what you chose..but apparently it is for them.

I don't SEEK to find fault with every choice that people make, but sometimes, it's pretty clear when a bad choice/decision has been reached. And the bad decision making continues.

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

While you think having "too many children" are a bad choice, I May think 2 parents working is a bad choice/decision...do you see what I mean. No one has the right to say that either is a bad choice!
An argument could be made that be having 2 parents working you are using up my resources by having to use more resources going to work.
No one way is right or wrong, I believe that it all evens out in the long-run of things.

I understand what you are trying to say, but I don't agree with you.

FWIW...I think everyone has the right to say what they think is a bad choice. That's what we live in America for: The freedom of choice, the freedom of speech, etc.
You can express your opinion on what is bad/good in a very nice and friendly way or you can be a witch and make everyone angry. But, either way, forming your own opinion and then expressing that opinion is your right (until such time as the current administration takes that right away )

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

ok...but I do not consider saying someone has a liter is nice.
But anyway..I would like to know what is the magic number that people think is "too many children" for a married couple to have. I know a lot of 3 or 4 time marriages that have lots of kids between the different familes. Is that different then 1 family having that same amount of children?

I dont know when my mom was a kid in our small town thier were some huge families with between 15-20 kids per family & most of the kids from those families only had 1-2 kids so maybe it wont necessarily be that all have 17 maybe thats not for everyone I dont know many women who want to have tha many kids after they give birth a few times.

__________________
mom of 3 greats girls

Everyone has the right to make the decision about the size of their family.
Everyone has the right to have an opinion about everyone else.
Everyone has the right to disprespect or think badly about the decisions of others.
As long as we don't start fights or wars over these ideas and opinions everyone will live happily ever after.

But wait............Isn't this already happening in the world?

The Duggers are doing what they want to.
If they are happy, who are we to judge?
You cannot say that they are using up too many of our resources.
Maybe we should kill off all of the people in prison who are "no good" and using up our resources?
Or how about all the homeless?
Unwed mothers?
Long haired boys?
Blue eyed people?
Old people?
You?
Me?

__________________
Square dancing is friendship set to music!

Personally? I think the parents are incredibly selfish.

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

So how many children is too many? I'm from a family of 12 children, I am not going to have that many, maybe 1/3 of the amount. I have a sister who has 5 and that's the most that any of us have had... I also have many aunts who have 7, 8, and 9 living children... None of my cousins are having that many, but I'm just curious to see how many is too many. I doubt andy of the Duggars children will have as many children, just because the parents are. Now, the same math could be used for my family, my parents should have 144 grandchildren... They have under 25. Even if the girls all decide they want to have large familiies, they would have to find someone who also agrees with that mindset, and I doubt any of the boys will find girls willing to have families that big. I do have to say, coming from a large family, I loved growing up with so many siblings. I love our family get togethers, I love my children having so many cousins, all of my sisters are my best friends. Obviously my parents didn't brainwash me into having so many kids, but they did instill certain values in me. Is that what the problem is, that they have so many children they are raising with Conservative values?
Just my 2 cents...

WHOA!
Relax, NONBELIEVER, don't have a stroke over what little old me has to say!!!

__________________
Square dancing is friendship set to music!

I think this is a bit dramatic!! I don't think that anyone suggesting killing off anyone. As for myself, I feel that they are a bit irresponsbile, and that's about the extent of my opinion on the subject. Oh, actually not....I looked at their website photo album....I am also of the opinion that they are a very good looking family whot get to travel a lot!

cj/

I say we start with the poor kids who get school supplies donated to them.

__________________
@@@
l/ l/ l/
Dont go through life,
GROW through life

Real eyes...realize...real lies.

Yep! That's got to be it...damn those Conservatives!

(voice dripping w/ sarcasm)

I don't care if the parents are raising them conservative. My issue is I don't think the parents have done much raising after about the first 4 or 5. At that point, they started letting the older children raise the younger ones. Of course the children seem happy! They don't know any different. I honestly see this family and the others that follow the Quiverfull way as not being any different than many other religious cults...

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

Harming someone, even if it's a child molester is illegal, what the duggars are doing is not. That's the difference. You said most unwed mothers did not choose to be single mothers? I do have to disagree. They made a choice, and it leads to consequences... Now, bravo for them not aborting the child, but they could give it a family with a mom and dad. I know some who just keep having babies most likely trying to get the guy, one is now pregnant with twins, and wahoo, at least two of the kids will have the same dad.
It's too bad that everyone is talking about a family raising nice kids, and more people are not talking about ones who just keep having them until they reach 8 when the govt. caps how much $ they are given, I think it's more detrimental for society for all children being born just so the mom gets more support and isn't taking care of her kids... Really, can't you do something better with your time? Pick your battles, I guess most people voicing the loudest opposition are angry about all the little conservatives being born, the other kids born into welfare, they will be the liberals, so let's keep em coming!

Sweetums! You don't have anything to say that would cause my heart rate to increase, much less to cause me to have a stroke.

I was just responding to your assinine post about killing people because they were different. No one has even suggested killing the Duggars. Some of expressed their opinions that the Duggar parents are selfish, irresponsible, stupid, etc. But none have even made the slightest suggestion that they should be taken out at dawn and shot.

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

So the cap is 4 or 5? So if someone has 6 or more than that's too many? Good to know, I'll let my parents know, I shouldn't have been born! I'm #6.

I was trying to be dramatic to show how these little upsets can turn into great big events.

Who was it,?......God, I think, who said to go forth and populate the earth?

__________________
Square dancing is friendship set to music!

That's funny!

You seem really concerned about the whole conservative/liberal thing....

That said: Can't YOU do something better with your time? You're in this thread arguing just as long and loud as some of the others! I'm thinking that's kind like the pot calling the kettle black.

And if you know so many women who got pregnant for the reasons you listed---just a suggestion but, maybe you should pick better friends!

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

MarilynK, first thing, I didn't get started until just now in this whole debate, I thought I would add my two cents since everyone is saying how all their kids are going to have litters of kids too. Coming from a large family, I thought I would shed light on this subject and let everyone know, the world is not going to be overrun by the duggars.
What I meant about the time, was that instead of slamming on this family, who are raising nice friendly children, why not be more concerned with other social issues... That are more draining on society.
And I never said the women were my friends, I just said I knew them... I have great friends. Not one of them a drain on society!

I think that is the way most families was raised years ago. The older ones always helping out with the younger ones. It seems my parents, grandparents turn out just fine. Kids did more chores then than now.
But as, with any "supervisor" job (as the mother) you do not see all the tasks at she does.
Maybe some of their responsibilies seem to some of ya as extreme...it probably is not so.

Shedding light on a subject usually means you have some information/knowledge about the subject that others do not. You spoke from personal experience, while I'm sure that is appreciated, is not exactly shedding light on anything.

And, since you don't seem to understand--I think some do look at one family having 17 kids (and from all accounts intending to have more) as a social issue that does place a drain on society. It's a difference of opinion on what some may find as a drain on society.

Personally? I find it draining when someone makes everything about conservative vs. liberals.

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

Just remember you said it, not me.

I never put a cap on how many kids, I picked 4/5 randomly, as that would appear to be when the oldest kids were "entrusted" to raise their siblings.

I think it would be wrong to have 2 kids that were several years apart and expect the oldest one to be responsible and basically raise the youngest.

It's not the amount, it is the behaviour! Is it that hard to comprehend?

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

Not hard to comprehend. I just disagree. Nothing wrong with hard work..it keeps kids out of trouble. Ever notice most of the teenagers nowdays are always in trouble..their excuse..I bored! You can't be bored if you have work to do.

Edit to say..it just a different lifestyle...I still do not understand why people are so against it. The way of raising children this way (with the older ones been responsible and taking care of the younger ones) worked for the last couple of generations. At least in my grandparents and DH grandparents were brought up with 15 + kids with my grandparents taking in 4 other children that was not theirs and rasing them like their own.

If it's not the amount, WHY is everyone complaining about the AMOUNT??? I understand being critical of her having the other kids help do things most moms do exclusively, but everyone is complaining about the #17!

Nope, there is nothing wrong with hard work. All children should have chores. I totally agree with you on that aspect of it.

BUT....older siblings should not be responsible for the care and raising of the younger siblings, while Mom just pops out more and more kids.

Since the conservative/liberal issue was brought in: Conservative rail against moms who are on public assistance who have more kids, because the taxpayer is paying for those kids. Well, I think that anyone who continues to have more kids with the expectation that the older children will raise them is just as bad. What's the phrase I've heard on this very board from some? "if you can't afford children, you shouldn't have children"? I think that's it. Well, in my opinion, if you can't RAISE your own children then you shouldn't have more children!

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

Dearheart, because 17 is how many they have. People were up in arms on #s 15 and 16 (which is when I believe they really came in the public eye/spotlight).

__________________
Jesus love me--you he only tolerates!

Ok it seems you have a problem with their parenting choices in their families.
By the way, I have 7 kids (that I homeschooled)...they all live at home but some are in their early 20's. Years ago the older ones have help take care of the younger ones but Not to the entent of the Duggers. Around here everyone just pitches in. I still do most of the "inside" work but have lots of help. My reason is I don't eat all the food and I don't wear all the clothes.... so everyone has to pitch in and help cook and do clothes.
By far, I still do most of the "mommy work" not the kids. They are required to help out but not to the extreme as the Dugger family does it.

Nonbeliever, I completely agree with you! I do agree that if you can't raise your kids you shouldn't have them, same with affording them, but also being able to emotionally deal with them... Hence, the reason why I'm not having a litter of my own. I just think that everyone is blasting this woman when the kids are turning out okay, and more focus should be on other issues... That's my opinion. I also do think that my parents had too many. I wouldn't trade any of my siblings for anything, but I think they took on more than they could handle emotionally, and financially... I just don't want everyone thinking, just because the parents had that many, so will the kids... They will all probably just have 3 or 4 like the rest of the world! I've known other large(8+kids) families, and none of the kids are having near the amount of their parents.

Ok it seems you have a problem with their parenting choices in their families.
By the way, I have 7 kids (that I homeschooled)...they all live at home but some are in their early 20's. Years ago the older ones have help take care of the younger ones but Not to the entent of the Duggers. Around here everyone just pitches in. I still do most of the "inside" work but have lots of help. My reason is I don't eat all the food and I don't wear all the clothes.... so everyone has to pitch in and help cook and do clothes.
By far, I still do most of the "mommy work" not the kids. They are required to help out but not to the extreme as the Dugger family does it.

Ok it seems you have a problem with their parenting choices in their families.
By the way, I have 7 kids (that I homeschooled)...they all live at home but some are in their early 20's. Years ago the older ones have help take care of the younger ones but Not like the Duggers. Around here everyone just pitches in. I still do most of the "inside" work but have lots of help. My reason is I don't eat all the food and I don't wear all the clothes.... so everyone has to pitch in and help cook and do clothes.
By far, I still do most of the "mommy work" not the kids. They are required to help out but not to the extreme as the Dugger family does it.

FOrrestlayne....I think we got it!

Sorry..the button must of had a mind of it's own..sorry for the triple post!!!

I don't know how often this runs in families.

My Grandmother is one of 10. She had 2. One of hers had 4, the other had 2.

All my Grandmother's siblings had between 1-4 children, no one came close to having 10.

I don't think everyone in a large family is going to want that many kids and what about those that end up sterile or marry someone that way?

It's some funky math to figure up all those kids! I would just be very surprised if it turned out that way.

__________________