Chrissy Teigen welcomes baby #4!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This made my jaw drop a bit but I'm very happy for them. At least from my viewpoint, they appear to be a very loving family.

Who has a surrogate have a baby when they’re already pregnant with another? This feels like family manufacturing, not need.

Not your call or business though.

DP. Not our call but when you are announcing your kids online and providing a bunch of detail about how they were conceived, it becomes public business. People are going to have opinions and you can't control the fact that people will talk about it.

I would never comment negatively on someone's birth announcement, but I have no problem judging/discussing here. The use of surrogacy like this is not something universally accepted and people are going to talk.

Agree. There's a reason surrogacy is illegal in many places throughout the world.

[Anonymous]

Omg!!! Amazing.
God bless her and her family! I’m

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay, I'll be the jerk.

I continue to be disturbed by the casual use of surrogates by celebrities, but especially by celebrities who already have kids or who are clearly capable of having kids themselves. I understand surrogacy better in situations of infertility or same-sex couples where it's your best bet for having a child at all. I do not understand surrogacy in this situation, especially after JUST having another baby. This is truly a situation of just renting a woman's womb, and it makes me uncomfortable, regardless of how well compensated I'm sure the surrogate was.

Also, given Teigan's social media activity and how much she posts about her kids online, this absolutely feels like a Hilaria-esque effort to create more content factories by having more kids and ensuring her feeds can be full of cute kids (she and Legend absolutely have adorable kids, no question) for the foreseeable future. Plenty of celebs have lots of kids but don't splash them all over their social media constantly or use them in promoting their projects.

It all feels exploitative to me. I know people will say "but she lost a baby, have empathy." And I do, I have enormous empathy for what Teigan and the whole family went through with the still birth. But that doesn't mean I endorse all her choices, and honestly this one makes me uncomfortable.

At least I believe the kids will be loved and obviously they have the financial resources for four kids, so there is that.

Anyway, go ahead and tell me I'm "just jealous" or scream at me for not being thrilled for them.

There is fertility issues…she did IVF to conceive all her babies.

There's a big difference between someone hiring a surrogate to have their only children, and someone who has conceived and given birth to three healthy kids hiring a surrogate to have their fourth.

I get that some people want big families and that's fine. But there's a marked difference between having fewer kids than you wanted (I had fewer kids than I wanted, ftr) and wanting kids but not having them at all.

So I’m your world surrogacy should only be for people who have no kids and then they should only have that 1 kid? This is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay, I'll be the jerk.

I continue to be disturbed by the casual use of surrogates by celebrities, but especially by celebrities who already have kids or who are clearly capable of having kids themselves. I understand surrogacy better in situations of infertility or same-sex couples where it's your best bet for having a child at all. I do not understand surrogacy in this situation, especially after JUST having another baby. This is truly a situation of just renting a woman's womb, and it makes me uncomfortable, regardless of how well compensated I'm sure the surrogate was.

Also, given Teigan's social media activity and how much she posts about her kids online, this absolutely feels like a Hilaria-esque effort to create more content factories by having more kids and ensuring her feeds can be full of cute kids (she and Legend absolutely have adorable kids, no question) for the foreseeable future. Plenty of celebs have lots of kids but don't splash them all over their social media constantly or use them in promoting their projects.

It all feels exploitative to me. I know people will say "but she lost a baby, have empathy." And I do, I have enormous empathy for what Teigan and the whole family went through with the still birth. But that doesn't mean I endorse all her choices, and honestly this one makes me uncomfortable.

At least I believe the kids will be loved and obviously they have the financial resources for four kids, so there is that.

Anyway, go ahead and tell me I'm "just jealous" or scream at me for not being thrilled for them.

There is fertility issues…she did IVF to conceive all her babies.

There's a big difference between someone hiring a surrogate to have their only children, and someone who has conceived and given birth to three healthy kids hiring a surrogate to have their fourth.

I get that some people want big families and that's fine. But there's a marked difference between having fewer kids than you wanted (I had fewer kids than I wanted, ftr) and wanting kids but not having them at all.

So I’m your world surrogacy should only be for people who have no kids and then they should only have that 1 kid? This is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Can this obnoxious talentless bully please just GO AWAY??? She's unwell.

[Anonymous]

I hate to say it, but this is 100% the dark, deep un-fillable hole that is losing a child. Some people have tons of children thinking it will somehow fill that sad void. It doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay, I'll be the jerk.

I continue to be disturbed by the casual use of surrogates by celebrities, but especially by celebrities who already have kids or who are clearly capable of having kids themselves. I understand surrogacy better in situations of infertility or same-sex couples where it's your best bet for having a child at all. I do not understand surrogacy in this situation, especially after JUST having another baby. This is truly a situation of just renting a woman's womb, and it makes me uncomfortable, regardless of how well compensated I'm sure the surrogate was.

Also, given Teigan's social media activity and how much she posts about her kids online, this absolutely feels like a Hilaria-esque effort to create more content factories by having more kids and ensuring her feeds can be full of cute kids (she and Legend absolutely have adorable kids, no question) for the foreseeable future. Plenty of celebs have lots of kids but don't splash them all over their social media constantly or use them in promoting their projects.

It all feels exploitative to me. I know people will say "but she lost a baby, have empathy." And I do, I have enormous empathy for what Teigan and the whole family went through with the still birth. But that doesn't mean I endorse all her choices, and honestly this one makes me uncomfortable.

At least I believe the kids will be loved and obviously they have the financial resources for four kids, so there is that.

Anyway, go ahead and tell me I'm "just jealous" or scream at me for not being thrilled for them.

There is fertility issues…she did IVF to conceive all her babies.

There's a big difference between someone hiring a surrogate to have their only children, and someone who has conceived and given birth to three healthy kids hiring a surrogate to have their fourth.

I get that some people want big families and that's fine. But there's a marked difference between having fewer kids than you wanted (I had fewer kids than I wanted, ftr) and wanting kids but not having them at all.

So I’m your world surrogacy should only be for people who have no kids and then they should only have that 1 kid? This is ridiculous.

So in your world, anytime a rich person with any number of children wants to just rent a woman's uterus for 9+ months, they should be able to do so? We should just have an underclass of working and middle class women who save wealthy women the trouble of pregnancy and birth? Mmmkay.

Something fascinating to me about this thread is that we know that Teigan's surrogate had a miscarriage before conceiving this pregnancy that she was able to bring to term. Yet not one person has mentioned that miscarriage. Of course not -- just part of the job, right? If you or I miscarried, we'd deserve sympathy and support, but if a surrogate miscarries, well, back to the coal mines she goes.

What is ridiculous again? Explain it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hate to say it, but this is 100% the dark, deep un-fillable hole that is losing a child. Some people have tons of children thinking it will somehow fill that sad void. It doesn't.

Um, what? I had a stillborn and was not and am not in a "dark, deep un-fillable hole" from it. We did not have any more children. Not everyone reacts to everything the same way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay, I'll be the jerk.

I continue to be disturbed by the casual use of surrogates by celebrities, but especially by celebrities who already have kids or who are clearly capable of having kids themselves. I understand surrogacy better in situations of infertility or same-sex couples where it's your best bet for having a child at all. I do not understand surrogacy in this situation, especially after JUST having another baby. This is truly a situation of just renting a woman's womb, and it makes me uncomfortable, regardless of how well compensated I'm sure the surrogate was.

Also, given Teigan's social media activity and how much she posts about her kids online, this absolutely feels like a Hilaria-esque effort to create more content factories by having more kids and ensuring her feeds can be full of cute kids (she and Legend absolutely have adorable kids, no question) for the foreseeable future. Plenty of celebs have lots of kids but don't splash them all over their social media constantly or use them in promoting their projects.

It all feels exploitative to me. I know people will say "but she lost a baby, have empathy." And I do, I have enormous empathy for what Teigan and the whole family went through with the still birth. But that doesn't mean I endorse all her choices, and honestly this one makes me uncomfortable.

At least I believe the kids will be loved and obviously they have the financial resources for four kids, so there is that.

Anyway, go ahead and tell me I'm "just jealous" or scream at me for not being thrilled for them.

There is fertility issues…she did IVF to conceive all her babies.

There's a big difference between someone hiring a surrogate to have their only children, and someone who has conceived and given birth to three healthy kids hiring a surrogate to have their fourth.

I get that some people want big families and that's fine. But there's a marked difference between having fewer kids than you wanted (I had fewer kids than I wanted, ftr) and wanting kids but not having them at all.

So I’m your world surrogacy should only be for people who have no kids and then they should only have that 1 kid? This is ridiculous.

So in your world, anytime a rich person with any number of children wants to just rent a woman's uterus for 9+ months, they should be able to do so? We should just have an underclass of working and middle class women who save wealthy women the trouble of pregnancy and birth? Mmmkay.

Something fascinating to me about this thread is that we know that Teigan's surrogate had a miscarriage before conceiving this pregnancy that she was able to bring to term. Yet not one person has mentioned that miscarriage. Of course not -- just part of the job, right? If you or I miscarried, we'd deserve sympathy and support, but if a surrogate miscarries, well, back to the coal mines she goes.

What is ridiculous again? Explain it.

There’s no getting through to you and you wouldn’t understand. Because you’re a “hater.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay, I'll be the jerk.

I continue to be disturbed by the casual use of surrogates by celebrities, but especially by celebrities who already have kids or who are clearly capable of having kids themselves. I understand surrogacy better in situations of infertility or same-sex couples where it's your best bet for having a child at all. I do not understand surrogacy in this situation, especially after JUST having another baby. This is truly a situation of just renting a woman's womb, and it makes me uncomfortable, regardless of how well compensated I'm sure the surrogate was.

Also, given Teigan's social media activity and how much she posts about her kids online, this absolutely feels like a Hilaria-esque effort to create more content factories by having more kids and ensuring her feeds can be full of cute kids (she and Legend absolutely have adorable kids, no question) for the foreseeable future. Plenty of celebs have lots of kids but don't splash them all over their social media constantly or use them in promoting their projects.

It all feels exploitative to me. I know people will say "but she lost a baby, have empathy." And I do, I have enormous empathy for what Teigan and the whole family went through with the still birth. But that doesn't mean I endorse all her choices, and honestly this one makes me uncomfortable.

At least I believe the kids will be loved and obviously they have the financial resources for four kids, so there is that.

Anyway, go ahead and tell me I'm "just jealous" or scream at me for not being thrilled for them.

There is fertility issues…she did IVF to conceive all her babies.

There's a big difference between someone hiring a surrogate to have their only children, and someone who has conceived and given birth to three healthy kids hiring a surrogate to have their fourth.

I get that some people want big families and that's fine. But there's a marked difference between having fewer kids than you wanted (I had fewer kids than I wanted, ftr) and wanting kids but not having them at all.

So I’m your world surrogacy should only be for people who have no kids and then they should only have that 1 kid? This is ridiculous.

So in your world, anytime a rich person with any number of children wants to just rent a woman's uterus for 9+ months, they should be able to do so? We should just have an underclass of working and middle class women who save wealthy women the trouble of pregnancy and birth? Mmmkay.

Something fascinating to me about this thread is that we know that Teigan's surrogate had a miscarriage before conceiving this pregnancy that she was able to bring to term. Yet not one person has mentioned that miscarriage. Of course not -- just part of the job, right? If you or I miscarried, we'd deserve sympathy and support, but if a surrogate miscarries, well, back to the coal mines she goes.

What is ridiculous again? Explain it.

You’re not well.

[Anonymous]

Was it even her egg? doubt it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can this obnoxious talentless bully please just GO AWAY??? She's unwell.

This. She’s a sociopath who exploits her children for her own ego.

[Anonymous]

They most likely expected Chrissy to have another loss.

Im happy for them. I don’t envy the night duty right now. Glad they can afford extra hands.

As far as surrogacy, there are women that are happy to offer this service. Personally I would find it difficult, so I don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was it even her egg? doubt it

Do you post every thought? Likely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They most likely expected Chrissy to have another loss.

Im happy for them. I don’t envy the night duty right now. Glad they can afford extra hands.

As far as surrogacy, there are women that are happy to offer this service. Personally I would find it difficult, so I don’t.

LMAO - do you have any idea how much $ and help they have?!?! Their lives are nothing like ours.