k2bdeutmeyer Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Have you heard?? Michelle is pregnant again!! That makes 20 for them :) I always tell my husband I want to be her when I grow up, LOL! I so admire her patience and ability to parent so many children in such a calm and caring manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedmom4 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Wow. I love her, too! Thanks for sharing, Elise in NC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mytwomonkeys Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 i watched that show on netflix. i totally fell in love with their family too!! i can't wait to catch up on the following seasons, but that was my favorite show for a period :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMary2 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I was hoping the news was that there was going to be another wedding, but another baby is sweet too. I pray all goes well with this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandsam Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I absolutely adore the Duggars. Thanks for sharing this news! I hope she has an easy pregnancy and a healthy baby. I too was hoping for a wedding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iucounu Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I find it hard to get excited about any reality show. I find it even harder to get excited about hearing that a family may have a 20th child. I just don't see how each child can get what I consider to be a proper amount of parents' time and individual attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris in VA Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I'm thrilled for them. They recognize that their way isn't for everyone, but I do so love their acceptance of children as gifts to be celebrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgiana Daniels Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Wow! I really thought they might be done after what happened with the last one. By all appearances, they are great parents. As a sidenote--I wonder what the record is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawnM Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I am not worried about individual attention, but after some risky pregnancies I worry about her health and really think it is time she stopped having them and take care of the ones she already has. She is nice, she is a good mom, but that is about where my admiration ends. I haven't ever understood the quiverful movement or the Bill Gothard thing though. Ok, well, I "understand" it cognitively, but as something to actually follow? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhonda in TX Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I too was hoping for a wedding. I haven't watched the show in awhile. Is there any sign of a pending wedding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvasMom Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Wow. Usually I'm not shocked by a pregnancy announcement from her (lol!) but I thought between Josey's situation and having grandbabies now and her age that she was done. I had my money on the announcement being a wedding for one of the older kids. I like that they will have an even 20 though. 19 is an awkward number and 20 feels better but that's an OCD brain for ya. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenjenn Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I find it hard to get excited about any reality show. I find it even harder to get excited about hearing that a family may have a 20th child. I just don't see how each child can get what I consider to be a proper amount of parents' time and individual attention. *I* know *I* couldn't give 20 children a proper amount of time and individual attention, but suspect *they* do. I suspect they will give more attention to child #20 than some people give who have to their 1 or 2 children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halcyon Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 And the world's population continues to climb...7 billion and counting :glare: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisemomof4 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I am not worried about individual attention, but after some risky pregnancies I worry about her health and really think it is time she stopped having them and take care of the ones she already has. :iagree: The last baby really suffered. I hope this baby will be healthy from the very beginning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvasMom Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 *I* know *I* couldn't give 20 children a proper amount of time and individual attention, but suspect *they* do. I suspect they will give more attention to child #20 than some people give who have to their 1 or 2 children. :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twoforjoy Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I find it hard to get excited about any reality show. This. And I really don't find somebody having their 20th child any more amazing or worthy of congratulations than somebody having their 1st or 3rd or 6th or whatever, you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShutterBug Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 And the world's population continues to climb...7 billion and counting :glare: :001_rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvasMom Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 And the world's population continues to climb...7 billion and counting :glare: The world needs more of her children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twoforjoy Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 And the world's population continues to climb...7 billion and counting :glare: While I'm not a fan of the Duggars, one couple having 20 kids isn't a problem. If it was a trend then, yes, it would be an issue. But I think it's a mistake to make overpopulation an individual issue. We've got three kids, and may have a fourth one day, but I have one sibling who has no kids, and my DH is an only child. So we figure we could have four and still not be overpopulating the planet. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KungFuPanda Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 :lurk5: Popcorn for breakfast! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silliness7 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Have you heard?? Michelle is pregnant again!! That makes 20 for them :) I always tell my husband I want to be her when I grow up, LOL! I so admire her patience and ability to parent so many children in such a calm and caring manner. I was just wondering about them yesterday. Weird. I hope things go better for this little one. Anyone know how their preemie is doing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgiana Daniels Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 The world needs more of her children. :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k2bdeutmeyer Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 I was just wondering about them yesterday. Weird. I hope things go better for this little one. Anyone know how their preemie is doing? The NBC article said she is doing well and will turn 2 in December. ETA: I didn't realize this could/would be a controversial subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I am not worried about individual attention, but after some risky pregnancies I worry about her health and really think it is time she stopped having them and take care of the ones she already has. She is nice, she is a good mom, but that is about where my admiration ends. I haven't ever understood the quiverful movement or the Bill Gothard thing though. Ok, well, I "understand" it cognitively, but as something to actually follow? No. :iagree: Except, I do understand the quiverful movement (and you have people at different points on the spectrum of that meaning...Duggars are on the FAR end) and I've been through the Gothard thing and honestly, I've seen points where the Duggars break with Gothard...considering Gothardites I knew often promoted Ezzo and Pearl, yet the Duggars have listed themselves as Attached Parents and Michelle has been seen using a babysling, which is a big Ezzo no-no "insert Mrs. Ezzo's comments on uncivilised/heathens in other countries and how slings are bad for babies". (I'll look to see if I can find an exact quote of hers, but it might be hard since you can't see the videos without attending classes, much like Gothard's seminars, where we weren't supposed to show our books to anyone else). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisemomof4 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 :lurk5: Popcorn for breakfast! :lol::lol::lol: do you have coffee or tea with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KristenR Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I have watched a few shows but I really don't know much about them. I do know the blogosphere is ripe with people ripping the family apart. But correct me if I am wrong- and I may be given the fact that I haven't followed this show. But doesn't this family take care of themselves with no financial assistance or welfare from the government. Has this always been the case? I know people who can't do that with 1 kid let alone 20. In fact, I'm almost ashamed to admit I know a woman (girl really) who purposely got pregnant to collect more money from the government so she wouldn't have to work while her boyfriend served his jail sentence. I don't know about you all- but I shudder to think what her children will grow up to be like. I would bank on the busy but loving house of the Duggar's anyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisemomof4 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I was just wondering about them yesterday. Weird. I hope things go better for this little one. Anyone know how their preemie is doing? every time I see your avatar I think you're Pencil Pusher.:001_smile: I was shocked to see you here today.;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 (edited) And the world's population continues to climb...7 billion and counting :glare::001_rolleyes:I happily contribute my eight :D (btw, I have quite a few family members that are "child free by choice"...I'm just making up for it ;) ) Edited November 8, 2011 by mommaduck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silliness7 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 The NBC article said she is doing well and will turn 2 in December. ETA: I didn't realize this could/would be a controversial subject. I am very glad to hear it. I think the Duggars are a sweet family and I'm happy for them. Depending on my mood their naysayers make me sad or give me a headache. Glad I caught this thread at the beginning before it gets awful. :glare: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisemomof4 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 The NBC article said she is doing well and will turn 2 in December. ETA: I didn't realize this could/would be a controversial subject. TWO??!!!!! WOW! Where DOES the time go??!!!! I'm so glad she's doing well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twoforjoy Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I know people who can't do that with 1 kid let alone 20. In fact, I'm almost ashamed to admit I know a woman (girl really) who purposely got pregnant to collect more money from the government so she wouldn't have to work while her boyfriend served his jail sentence. I don't know about you all- but I shudder to think what her children will grow up to be like. I would bank on the busy but loving house of the Duggar's anyday. I'm not going to fault anybody for needing public assistance. Being poor is not a reason for shame, and having been fortunate enough to be able to provide for a large family is not a point of pride. And I'm most certainly not going to write off the children of people on welfare or in poverty. I don't shudder to think what the children of people on welfare will grow up to be like, and I'm saddened anybody would. It's this kind of smug self-righteousness that the Duggars seem to inspire in people that makes me dislike them. They may be great people. But the fact that so many people look at them and think "If they can have 20 people and not take public assistance, then anybody who does rely on public assistance must be a lazy irresponsible bum who doesn't deserve kids or will ruin their kids!" really bothers me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 *I* know *I* couldn't give 20 children a proper amount of time and individual attention, but suspect *they* do. I suspect they will give more attention to child #20 than some people give who have to their 1 or 2 children. I know that is the case in my home. Baby #10 is showered with far more time, attention, and downright giddy enjoyment than we gave our first few kids. Not because they were loved less, but because we took so much more for granted back then and our priorities were so much different back then. And then there is the constant attention of his 9 siblings. I can't even imagine having a large family like the Duggars and I'm not trying to beat them. The reality is very few people ever get the chance to have a large family like mine, much less theirs, whether they would want to or not. And I would never presume people would stop having children because of a difficult pregnancy, delivery, or other complications. Those things often make people want another MORE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgiana Daniels Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I'm not going to fault anybody for needing public assistance. Being poor is not a reason for shame, and having been fortunate enough to be able to provide for a large family is not a point of pride. And I'm most certainly not going to write off the children of people on welfare or in poverty. I don't shudder to think what the children of people on welfare will grow up to be like, and I'm saddened anybody would. It's this kind of smug self-righteousness that the Duggars seem to inspire in people that makes me dislike them. They may be great people. But the fact that so many people look at them and think "If they can have 20 people and not take public assistance, then anybody who does rely on public assistance must be a lazy irresponsible bum who doesn't deserve kids or will ruin their kids!" really bothers me. While I agree with this statement in general, I think the person who originally mentioned the welfare issue stated the person THEY knew had a child on purpose in order to get welfare, and was worried what THAT kid would grow up like considering their situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarlaS Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I'm not going to fault anybody for needing public assistance. Being poor is not a reason for shame, and having been fortunate enough to be able to provide for a large family is not a point of pride. And I'm most certainly not going to write off the children of people on welfare or in poverty. I don't shudder to think what the children of people on welfare will grow up to be like, and I'm saddened anybody would. I thought it had more to do with having a child purposely just for money than being poor or needing assistance. At least that's what she SAID. When someone has kids for any purpose other than wanting to be a parent, yes, I'd wonder what kind of parenting they would bother to do--regardless of their financial situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I know that is the case in my home. Baby #10 is showered with far more time, attention, and downright giddy enjoyment than we gave our first few kids. Not because they were loved less, but because we took so much more for granted back then and our priorities were so much different back then. And then there is the constant attention of his 9 siblings. I can't even imagine having a large family like the Duggars and I'm not trying to beat them. The reality is very few people ever get the chance to have a large family like mine, much less theirs, whether they would want to or not. And I would never presume people would stop having children because of a difficult pregnancy, delivery, or other complications. Those things often make people want another MORE. :iagree: All other issues aside, a friend of mine (mother of six, grandmother of two) once told me, "when your done, you'll know it." She was right. One friend was done a three, another at six, myself at eight, and if Michelle isn't done yet, that is between her, her husband, and God. Everything else is moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veritaserum Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 It seems unlikely that this pregnancy and birth will be normal after what happened with Josie. I hope everything goes well, but in her shoes I'd have thanked God that my baby and I lived through the last one and I'd have called it quits to make sure I'd be around for my other kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaxMom Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Have you heard?? Michelle is pregnant again!! That makes 20 for them :) I always tell my husband I want to be her when I grow up, LOL! I so admire her patience and ability to parent so many children in such a calm and caring manner. I do, too, but I would like to channel that calm with the 3 I have at home. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kahlanne Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 While I agree with this statement in general, I think the person who originally mentioned the welfare issue stated the person THEY knew had a child on purpose in order to get welfare, and was worried what THAT kid would grow up like considering their situation. I agree. Being poor and on welfare but trying to get off welfare and make a better life for your family is something to be admired. Intentionally staying on welfare and abusing the system is something I detest. I have seen both examples. Also, I doubt that the Duggars are just fortunate to have the means to support their family. I am quite sure it takes lots of energy and hard work. Most people I know that appear richer than I are that way because they made better choices than I did. Some had a better start than I but in the end it is my bad money choices holding me back. I am not saying I would ever have millions but definitely an easier life had I chosen differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Women have preeclampsia all the time. It is nothing to mess around with, but if anything, I suspect this pregnancy will go better because they know to be more vigilant this time. Many women who have a complicated due to preeclampsia pregnancy/delivery still continue to have a 2nd or 3rd baby and no one tells them they are wrong to do so. I don't see why it would be wrong for the Duggars either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denisemomof4 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I don't know, or care, whether or not they ever received public assistance. I know Bob started off with a used car business and he and Michelle started to buy up commercial property. It's the rental income from the property that supported their family, but I'm sure now they're receiving quite a paycheck for doing their show. I know more screwed up and nasty rich people, or from rich homes, than I do poor. I grew up in one of the most expensive areas in our country, at least at the time (Marin County, just north of San Francisco) and I knew a lot of rich people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnnaM Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I'm not going to fault anybody for needing public assistance. Being poor is not a reason for shame, and having been fortunate enough to be able to provide for a large family is not a point of pride. And I'm most certainly not going to write off the children of people on welfare or in poverty. I don't shudder to think what the children of people on welfare will grow up to be like, and I'm saddened anybody would. It's this kind of smug self-righteousness that the Duggars seem to inspire in people that makes me dislike them. They may be great people. But the fact that so many people look at them and think "If they can have 20 people and not take public assistance, then anybody who does rely on public assistance must be a lazy irresponsible bum who doesn't deserve kids or will ruin their kids!" really bothers me. Admiring someone for working hard and staying off of welfare doesn't mean that everyone automatically assumes everyone who doesn't is a lazy bum. What the Duggars do financially is admirable. They sacrifice new for used, they are frugal, and they work hard. Why isn't that admirable? On the #20 note, I fear that she will leave 20+ children motherless someday. I think those children need her alive more than she needs another baby. I would have loved more children, but my body started protesting and I think my duty is to the ones already here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I don't know, or care, whether or not they ever received public assistance. I know Bob started off with a used car business and he and Michelle started to buy up commercial property. It's the rental income from the property that supported their family, but I'm sure now they're receiving quite a paycheck for doing their show. I know more screwed up and nasty rich people, or from rich homes, than I do poor. I grew up in one of the most expensive areas in our country, at least at the time (Marin County, just north of San Francisco) and I knew a lot of rich people. :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veritaserum Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Women have preeclampsia all the time. It is nothing to mess around with, but if anything, I suspect this pregnancy will go better because they know to be more vigilant this time. Many women who have a complicated due to preeclampsia pregnancy/delivery still continue to have a 2nd or 3rd baby and no one tells them they are wrong to do so. I don't see why it would be wrong for the Duggars either. Most cases of pre-eclampsia develop later in pregnancy and are not as severe as what she experienced with Josie. Michelle had pre-eclampsia with other pregnancies (2, I think), but the severity and earliness of what she had with Josie substantially increase the risk of another early and severe case. Pre-eclampsia before 30 weeks is generally much more serious in its danger to mothers and babies than when it develops later in pregnancy. Most cases develop in the third trimester. Michelle has also had four (?) c-sections and she is in her 40s. It's not impossible for her to have a normal, healthy pregnancy, but she is taking on significant risks to have this baby. It just seems rather reckless to play the odds when you'd leave 19 children motherless if the odds don't fall in your favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 On the #20 note, I fear that she will leave 20+ children motherless someday. I think those children need her alive more than she needs another baby. I would have loved more children, but my body started protesting and I think my duty is to the ones already here. :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakia Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Most cases of pre-eclampsia develop later in pregnancy and are not as severe as what she experienced with Josie. Michelle had pre-eclampsia with other pregnancies (2, I think), but the severity and earliness of what she had with Josie substantially increase the risk of another early and severe case. Pre-eclampsia before 30 weeks is generally much more serious in its danger to mothers and babies than when it develops later in pregnancy. Most cases develop in the third trimester. Michelle has also had four (?) c-sections and she is in her 40s. It's not impossible for her to have a normal, healthy pregnancy, but she is taking on significant risks to have this baby. It just seems rather reckless to play the odds when you'd leave 19 children motherless if the odds don't fall in your favor. I like the Duggars, and I agree with you 100%. But to them, they aren't playing the odds. They are honoring their very legalistic biblical views. I don't think they will stop having babies until it is physically impossible for Michelle to have them. I hope that it isn't made impossible by her death. Like a pp said, I would HATE to see all those children left motherless. That would be tragic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuirkyKapers Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Wow- #20. I know I couldn't do it. Michelle seems pretty laid back from the talk I heard from her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoughCollie Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I find it hard to get excited about any reality show. I find it even harder to get excited about hearing that a family may have a 20th child. I just don't see how each child can get what I consider to be a proper amount of parents' time and individual attention. :iagree: No matter what, they have the same 24 hours in a day that the rest of us do. Their children may get enough attention since many are older and can give attention to the younger ones, but that does not mean that they each get enough individual parental attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacia Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I think that's a disturbing piece of news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renee in NC Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Wow! I really thought they might be done after what happened with the last one. By all appearances, they are great parents. As a sidenote--I wonder what the record is? Higher than 20.;) The man who helped pour the concrete when we built our house in 2003 was one of 24. Yes, they were all from the same set of parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veritaserum Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I like the Duggars, and I agree with you 100%. But to them, they aren't playing the odds. They are honoring their very legalistic biblical views. I don't think they will stop having babies until it is physically impossible for Michelle to have them. I hope that it isn't made impossible by her death. Like a pp said, I would HATE to see all those children left motherless. That would be tragic. I know. I do wonder how much worse they'd all feel if birthing babies killed her. I imagine it would be worse than usual if they believed God would protect her from biology. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts