Arkansas Mom Prepares for Birth of 17th Child

  • Thread starter Thread starter beckers
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CatholicSam said:
Another thing to consider about primitave cultures considering spacing less than 3 years to be “shameful” is that those people don’t have access to the same kinds of healthcare and baby care products that we have. They don’t have great access to formula, baby vitamins, or antibiotics. So babies are dependent on mother’s breastmilk to get these things. If the mom gets pregnant and her milk dries up, that’s really disastrous for the baby who’s depending on that milk for much of his nutrition, vitamins, and antibodies! .
Click to expand...
Actually, that’s not true, come to find out!! There are rare mothers, even who are well-nourished who simply can’t breastfeed, and in these cultures their babies did not suffer malnourishment. They simply fed them raw goat’s or cows milk (and perhaps supplemented with some finely grated organ meats or whatever was available to them to be used as a supplement for whatever might be missing in the animal’s milk). See, this is what I mean, we think technology is our salvation, and it isn’t! Children on modern formula don’t do nearly as well as children in these cultures did on their mother’s homemade “formulas.” Those children thrived without health problems. Our suffer allergies, asthma, obesity, and everything else.
 
Rob_s_Wife said:
**My apologies for letting my hot head get the worst of me. I’ve asked the moderator to remove the portion of my post that I am personally ashamed to have my name attached to.:o **
I would like others to take a moment to understand what riled me so, no excuses for the shameful part though.
If you look at the list of things I quoted as being said …
Would you say something similiar about a couple who had discerned not to have more children?
For example, would you replace:
"popping out a baby a year without a thought"
with
"too selfish to give having children a thought"?

Would you tell them they are unnatural and unhealthy to not have more children?
Would you say they are imprudent and ignorant of the serious mistake they, according to you, are making?
Most people would agree that’s rather derogatory not not very thoughtful.
It’s bad enough parent’s hear so much blarney about not having children. The last thing they need is fellow catholic’s joinign the bandwagon.
Click to expand...
I accept your apology and I apologize for the “popping” remark. That could have been phrased better and I can see how it would have roused you to anger.
 
AnnaTherese said:
Actually, that’s not true, come to find out!! There are rare mothers, even who are well-nourished who simply can’t breastfeed, and in these cultures their babies did not suffer malnourishment. They simply fed them raw goat’s or cows milk (and perhaps supplemented with some finely grated organ meats or whatever was available to them to be used as a supplement for whatever might be missing in the animal’s milk). See, this is what I mean, we think technology is our salvation, and it isn’t! **Children on modern formula don’t do nearly as well as children in these cultures did on their mother’s homemade “formulas.” **Those children thrived without health problems. Our suffer allergies, asthma, obesity, and everything else.
Click to expand...
Very interesting! I always thought they used wet nurses. But I do believe that modern babies on formula probably thrive just as well as primitive babies on goat milk. Of course in modern cultures we also have many formula-fed babies in day care which does impact health.

Another thing I’m wondering is how Dr. Price could study people who never even encountered a missionary. How’d he find them? Communicate with them? Study them? Now I would not be surprised if primitive people had overall better health than those exposed to birth control hormones and insecticides in the water, carcinogenic chemicals in the food, etc. etc. But I still don’t think that you can look at some primitive cultures and turn around and say that women should have at least 3 years between babies (some of the quotes you’ve listed, I believe, say 3 years between pregnancies). There is plenty of evidence to show that closer spacing in modern cultures is not nearly as detrimental as closer spacings in primitive cultures. Competition for food in the home? I don’t think so.

I’m not sure if you saw my question earlier about twins and triplets. Are mothers of multiples also regarded with shame in primitive cultures? After all, if a mother can’t fulfill her child’s “attachment needs” with singletons born closer than 3 years apart, how in the world could she be successful with babies born a few minutes apart? (Not my view, but what it seems your view would have to believe)
 
AnnaTherese ~
I actually do agree with most everything you’ve said. I think this modern technology is making for one very sick nation - everything from pesticides and hormones in foods to vaccines and antibiotics in humans and livestock.

But like CatholicSam said, we have a lot more things that impact our health - daycares, public education, LOTS more stress, chemicals in our environment, etc…what am I getting at by saying this? I have no clue. I think I just lost my train of thought! 😊 Oh well…🤷

By the way - I think this is the second time you’ve referred to me as Sanctaparenta. It’s Sanctareparata - one of my favorite saints is Saint Reparata, and the name means “holy reparation”, not “holy parent.” 😃 Just had to point that out, because I’ve got a LONG way to go before I can call myself sancta parenta. 😉
 
CatholicSam said:
I’m not sure if you saw my question earlier about twins and triplets. Are mothers of multiples also regarded with shame in primitive cultures? After all, if a mother can’t fulfill her child’s “attachment needs” with singletons born closer than 3 years apart, how in the world could she be successful with babies born a few minutes apart? (Not my view, but what it seems your view would have to believe)
Click to expand...
I was actually watching a show on this awhile ago. In many primitive cultures, yes, it is a shame to have twins or triplets. So much so that when multiple births happen, a goat or something else is usually slaughtered, then the “witch doctor” comes to “read” its entrails to decide which child of the multiple birth gets to live. The others are killed, or abandoned in the wilderness and left to starve or be eaten by animals. It made me sick.

:gopray: Lord, send them missionaries.
 
sanctareparata said:
I was actually watching a show on this awhile ago. In many primitive cultures, yes, it is a shame to have twins or triplets. So much so that when multiple births happen, a goat or something else is usually slaughtered, then the “witch doctor” comes to “read” its entrails to decide which child of the multiple birth gets to live. The others are killed, or abandoned in the wilderness and left to starve or be eaten by animals. It made me sick.

:gopray: Lord, send them missionaries.
Click to expand...
:bigyikes: :bigyikes: :bigyikes: :bigyikes: :bigyikes:

OH yes! Lord please send them missionaries!
 
I have read through this whole thread, and just a thought here, because I know there has been some arguing over whether or not people should space children, and use nfp, and if they are being irresponsible having a large family, etc, etc…

I have 5 children, the youngest being 1 oldest being 8. Every time I begin my fertility after having each child, I question whether or not it is the right thing to avoid or whether it is the right thing to just let go, and let God. It is such a difficult decision to make because I am not God, and I don’t see the future, I don’t see my weaknesses like He does, I don’t see my strengths like He does…so sometimes it’s hard to make that decision. All I know is that each one of my children are blessings that I couldn’t imagine being without. Beyond my wildest dreams is what they are, even though the only one I was SURE I really could handle (beforehand) was my first one. Every other child, I questioned whether or not I could handle another. Well, God has given me the grace to handle them all, and here I am again at that time where I need to start thinking about whether or not I should avoid, and I’m scared again about what I should do.
Sorry for rambling. I think those of us having larger families can get defensive and hurt by some of the comments made in this thread, because we get negativity about the size of our family on a consistent basis, not only from this materialistic me, me, me, world, but from our own families! Making us feel as if our decision to be open to more was the wrong one.😦

I found this quote on the website that was linked in a previous post from this thread, I think the Jeub family website and I think this quote says it all.
"I remember praying as a young man for God to make me a rich man. He has since blessed me with 13 children. If I were to tell you that it has been an easy road, you’d think I was either Super Man or a liar. It hasn’t been easy, but what path in life is? Is the life of no children and all of the world’s treasures (travel, money, fame, pleasure) any easier than a life full of children? Perhaps it is easier, but ease doesn’t equate to fulfillment. Consider this heavily: lying on your death bed, will you treasure your riches you gathered over your lifetime, or will you treasure the surrounding comfort of children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren?

This is the argument that our family website puts in front of visitors: children are a gift from God; therefore, have children. It isn’t easy, but ease isn’t something God calls his people. He calls us to obedience, and if you feel the conviction to stop resisting God’s gifts and open the fertile womb, this is an incredibly simple truth that will build a heritage from the Lord."
 
I’m not trying to beat a dead horse here. No one on the board has said anything about people being irresponible for having large families. Most people have in fact stated that they don’t care whether someone has 300 children or 2. I am among those people. I don’t think it’s irresponsible to have children. What I personally have found irresponsible, is the Duggar child rearing method where Mom is only truly hands on with the child for 9 months in utero and 6 months of breastfeeding, when she weans and hands the child off to an older girl 'buddy" and actively starts trying to get pregnant again. That to me is the very definition of irresponsible (not the trying to get pregnant again, but to pass of current/ongoing responsibilities to someone who is more or less a chilld. When it comes to family planning, everyone has to do what’s right for them, I’d imagine a woman having her first child at 22 might feel more able, energetic whatever, to handle having another infant in the house a year later, while a woman at age 32, might not. Likewise a woman who had her first child at 37, might realize that times a tickin and she doesn’t have any real choice, and needs to get started on another right away. Someone may have had really horrible experience with being pregnant, or perhaps she has a child that is disabled in some way, and feels its necessary for her to give it some time before thinking about trying again, so she can be with a child who may need more help than your average infant/toddler.

I’m sorry that some of you guys have families in which you aren’t supported, that’s unfortunate. But I think it’s also important to remember, that perhaps those of us who don’t like the Duggars parenting methods simply just don’t like the Duggars parenting methods, and that it doesn’t necessarily mean we don’t like your parenting method. I haven’t gotten to see you on tv, if I did, and found your style of parenting to be refreshing I’d say complimentary things about you, if I saw you beating your children blind, I most likely wouldn’t have nice things to say (unless those kids deserved it ! 🙂 I’m thinking of my neighbors kids in this instance, the could use a swat where the good Lord split them. ) I just don’t agree with about 99% of Duggar parenting, including but not limited to passing off a good chunk of household duties onto just the girls. In my family, my brothers, my sister and myself know how to cook, do laundry, push a vacuum, and take out trash. In my case, I simply choose not to cook or do laundry. Well I do laundry but only when the pile becomes so large it’s neck and neck with K2 for second tallest peak in the world
 
OldAgeGuru said:
I’m not trying to beat a dead horse here. No one on the board has said anything about people being irresponible for having large families. Most people have in fact stated that they don’t care whether someone has 300 children or 2. I am among those people. I don’t think it’s irresponsible to have children. What I personally have found irresponsible, is the Duggar child rearing method where Mom is only truly hands on with the child for 9 months in utero and 6 months of breastfeeding, when she weans and hands the child off to an older girl 'buddy" and actively starts trying to get pregnant again. That to me is the very definition of irresponsible (not the trying to get pregnant again, but to pass of current/ongoing responsibilities to someone who is more or less a chilld. When it comes to family planning, everyone has to do what’s right for them, I’d imagine a woman having her first child at 22 might feel more able, energetic whatever, to handle having another infant in the house a year later, while a woman at age 32, might not. Likewise a woman who had her first child at 37, might realize that times a tickin and she doesn’t have any real choice, and needs to get started on another right away. Someone may have had really horrible experience with being pregnant, or perhaps she has a child that is disabled in some way, and feels its necessary for her to give it some time before thinking about trying again, so she can be with a child who may need more help than your average infant/toddler.

I’m sorry that some of you guys have families in which you aren’t supported, that’s unfortunate. But I think it’s also important to remember, that perhaps those of us who don’t like the Duggars parenting methods simply just don’t like the Duggars parenting methods, and that it doesn’t necessarily mean we don’t like your parenting method. I haven’t gotten to see you on tv, if I did, and found your style of parenting to be refreshing I’d say complimentary things about you, if I saw you beating your children blind, I most likely wouldn’t have nice things to say (unless those kids deserved it ! 🙂 I’m thinking of my neighbors kids in this instance, the could use a swat where the good Lord split them. ) I just don’t agree with about 99% of Duggar parenting, including but not limited to passing off a good chunk of household duties onto just the girls. In my family, my brothers, my sister and myself know how to cook, do laundry, push a vacuum, and take out trash. In my case, I simply choose not to cook or do laundry. Well I do laundry but only when the pile becomes so large it’s neck and neck with K2 for second tallest peak in the world
Click to expand...
I have to generally agree with you here.
 
I have to also just say that I would never say that raising only one child is easier than raising 12. Maybe it is, maybe it’s just about the same. All I know is it’s pretty darn hard with just one because there are no playmates and no one for them to talk to other than YOU. I pray everyday for another baby, believe me. I love reading stories like Cheaper by the Dozen and the Von Trapps. I especially love and admire the Von Trapps. I aspire to be very much like them. I would just love to have a nice big brood to sit around the prayer table with, or tell stories to, or just do…fun things with. I love the culture, the liturgical recipes, the music, the laughter and all of that. It makes me so sad that God is not allowing that for me at this point in my life because I long for it so much. Another thing to offer up. 🤷

About the twins thing, I don’t know the answer to that. My gut instinct is that it’s pretty unusual for that to happen in normal life, and we know that when people get unnatural fertility treatments they often end up with many multiples. So although it happens rarely, it’s hard to know why it happens (other than getting a treatment). Does anyone know what causes people to have multiple births? If I knew, perhaps I could compose a theory. 🙂 I haven’t read anything about it. I know people say it’s just genetic, but I have a hard time with that comment when referring to almost anything nowadays. Genetics plays a very minor part in things, IMO. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a sign of something being not right in the mother or father’s body. But I would never call those babies anything but a blessing, kwim? It’s hard to say, I agree with what someone just said, about how it’s hard to know the mind of God. What I have proposed, I have proposed as a possibility. I don’t know the will of God for me, much less everyone else. And I don’t profess to, at least I don’t think I have. Anyone who thinks they’ve been judged hasn’t been paying attention. Like having a baby in close spacing, you just thank God for the blessing and try to do whatever you can to ease the suffering, and offer up the rest. I’m sure there are plenty of benefits to go along with that suffering, and Jesus can sanctify anything. So there you go. Not much of a theory, but there you go.
 
sanctareparata said:
By the way - I think this is the second time you’ve referred to me as Sanctaparenta. It’s Sanctareparata - one of my favorite saints is Saint Reparata, and the name means “holy reparation”, not “holy parent.” 😃 Just had to point that out, because I’ve got a LONG way to go before I can call myself sancta parenta. 😉
Click to expand...
My apologies!! I’ve probably done it more times than that. Sorry!
 
CatholicSam said:
Another thing I’m wondering is how Dr. Price could study people who never even encountered a missionary. How’d he find them? Communicate with them? Study them? Now I would not be surprised if primitive people had overall better health than those exposed to birth control hormones and insecticides in the water, carcinogenic chemicals in the food, etc. etc. But I still don’t think that you can look at some primitive cultures and turn around and say that women should have at least 3 years between babies (some of the quotes you’ve listed, I believe, say 3 years between pregnancies). There is plenty of evidence to show that closer spacing in modern cultures is not nearly as detrimental as closer spacings in primitive cultures. Competition for food in the home? I don’t think so.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure how he knew where to look. That’s an interesting question. I’ll have to get out my book and look it up. I also have to say that I don’t necessarily agree with everything those links I posted say. Heaven knows I was doing a very quick search and some of those organizations can be very liberal. From what I understand from the sources that I do trust, 3 years between births is what is considered the minimum, 4 years being better. Personally, I think 5 years is too much. If personal experience means anything, we started trying for baby #2 shortly after my daughter turned 2, and it’s now been about 18 months. I’ve also been slowly gaining weight, an extra pound or so each month. I have heard that it’s fairly common for women to have this experience of trying for 18 months and suddenly getting pregnant. A friend of mine who also is a devout Catholic and knows Dr. Price well and espouses these same beliefs, says that perhaps my body just needs to get ready first. I’m putting very little junk in my body nowadays. My diet is, though not perfect, better than it has ever been, so perhaps my body is naturally holding off?!? I have no idea why that would be but it will be interesting to see my chart this next month or two. Please keep me in prayer!!
 
AnnaTherese said:
Does anyone know what causes people to have multiple births? If I knew, perhaps I could compose a theory. 🙂 I haven’t read anything about it. I know people say it’s just genetic, but I have a hard time with that comment when referring to almost anything nowadays.
Click to expand...
I have a particular interest in this topic, since twins “tend to run” in my family. One theory I have read about goes like this. Some women are genetically predisposed to double ovulation (one egg from each side), sometimes resulting in fraternal twins. I say, “sometimes” because both eggs aren’t always going to get fertilized. Just like most of the time, when a woman ovulates, the one egg doesn’t always meet up with a sperm. Identical twins, on the other hand, are just natural anomalies, so to speak, with no genetic link at all. This “double ovulation” also explains why twins are more common among more mature mothers, as the ovaries release more than one egg simultaneously (almost as if they’re trying to get rid of the rest of the eggs faster or something 😃 ).

Another theory I’ve heard is that diet is partially responsible. A certain tribe in Africa (I will now have to go look this up 😃 ) has the largest percentage of twin births in the world. They think it’s due to a particular vegetable root (yams?) high in folate (folic acid) that is prevalent in their diets. Within this tribe, twins are prized; a sign of “super fertility” on the part of the woman.

I have not come across any research done on multiples involving larger numbers of babies, though, besides twins. It is especially difficult to find research that deals with only naturally conceived multiples (without the use of fertility enhancers).

Okay, now that I’ve made all these crazy assertions, raise your hand if you want me to scrounge up some links. :cool:
 
Twins run in part of my family tree.

Truly Beloved is right that women inherit the propensity to double-ovulate, explaining fraternal twins.

There is some new research that suggests identical twins are the result of a collapsing embryo, splitting the progenitor cells (which contain the unique genetic information) in half and then eventually two fetuses form. (Paraphrased from the article). This happens much less frequently naturally and much more often during IVF due to the environmental differences.

Go here to read it.
 
First of all, I give them credit for being able to think of all those names!!! I had a teacher one semester whose father was one of 23, and I believe four of the boys were named “John” (not including the one named Ivan, which is the Russian form of John). I don’t know how the Duggars do it, because that sure must be exhausting physically!

God bless them for having such a large family. It’s not something I think I’d be able to do (although with how my fertility looks through charting, I don’t think it’s even a real possibility).
 
DH reply to all this is…

We better get busy so we can catch up .
:bigyikes:
 
They’re gonna have one huge family reunion in 60 years!

And I thought my family was huge… (going to that family reunion today). Ours is mostly Catholic, with a few Lutherans or Baptists, and other denominations that don’t fall into the usual categories.
 
I just want to know how they do all their laundry? Is their house clean usually? (Please tell me it’s untidy or I’ll be SO depressed!)
Are they organised?
I can’t keep my house clean with 4 children and it stresses me out so much to live in a mess…
If they can do it with 17, I think I’ll just go and cry!
( I feel so inadequate…poor me 😦 )
 
jules11 said:
I can’t keep my house clean with 4 children and it stresses me out so much to live in a mess…
If they can do it with 17, I think I’ll just go and cry!
( I feel so inadequate…poor me 😦 )
Click to expand...
Yeah, but look at all the people she has to help keep the house tidy! —KCT
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top