Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want to know how MANY nannies they have with four children. I have four children, and had one nanny. Her mother lives with her, but I bet there are also nannies. Any time I look at her social media it seems like they have tons of random people hanging around their house. I want to know how many are on payroll.

It is none of your business. Try to absorb that.

I'm allowed to wonder. Try to absorb that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m assuming it’s the timing- she wanted another and started making steps towards surrogacy but then also got pregnant

The other baby is older. So the timing would have been intentional. She was already pregnant and wanted another.

No, she laid it out in her post. They were working with two surrogates because they wanted two more kids. Then she decided to try one more time to have a baby on her own - got pregnant. Surrogate got pregnant and then miscarried. Surrogate had to have surgery before trying again, got pregnant again when Chrissy was 5 months along. Baby she carried is born, then baby the surrogate carried is born.

It's way outside my family-planning mindset, but it's not intentional timing any more than using a surrogate at all would be intentional timing. They intended to have the first pregnancy make it to term.

Right, so it was very intentional. She was already pregnant wanted another. Like I said.

You said "the timing" was intentional. Considering they lost a pregnancy with the surrogate, you are making a bizarre claim. They *intended* for the first pregnancy with the surrogate to lead to a baby, which would not have been this month. But yes, the fact that they had a baby with a surrogate was intentional, and was in process before she got pregnant.

Of course it is. There is no accident when your surrogate becomes pregnant. Do you know what intentional means or how surrogacy works?

Attacking a strawman on the triple down, very smooth. Do you know what timing means? Do you know that everyone can see the posts you're replying to when you *repeat my words* as though you're teaching me something?

I should have known not to comment on a Chrissy Teigen post. Y'all are as batshit as the Middleton/Markle warriors.

Whatever weirdo. But already being pregnant and deciding to go forward with a surrogate anyway is an interesting choice when you have several kids. I guess she loves babies.

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.

Almost the exact same spacing as the Baldwins.

Kid collectors. Such a weird thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m assuming it’s the timing- she wanted another and started making steps towards surrogacy but then also got pregnant

The other baby is older. So the timing would have been intentional. She was already pregnant and wanted another.

No, she laid it out in her post. They were working with two surrogates because they wanted two more kids. Then she decided to try one more time to have a baby on her own - got pregnant. Surrogate got pregnant and then miscarried. Surrogate had to have surgery before trying again, got pregnant again when Chrissy was 5 months along. Baby she carried is born, then baby the surrogate carried is born.

It's way outside my family-planning mindset, but it's not intentional timing any more than using a surrogate at all would be intentional timing. They intended to have the first pregnancy make it to term.

Right, so it was very intentional. She was already pregnant wanted another. Like I said.

You said "the timing" was intentional. Considering they lost a pregnancy with the surrogate, you are making a bizarre claim. They *intended* for the first pregnancy with the surrogate to lead to a baby, which would not have been this month. But yes, the fact that they had a baby with a surrogate was intentional, and was in process before she got pregnant.

Of course it is. There is no accident when your surrogate becomes pregnant. Do you know what intentional means or how surrogacy works?

Attacking a strawman on the triple down, very smooth. Do you know what timing means? Do you know that everyone can see the posts you're replying to when you *repeat my words* as though you're teaching me something?

I should have known not to comment on a Chrissy Teigen post. Y'all are as batshit as the Middleton/Markle warriors.

Anonymous wrote:I just want to know how MANY nannies they have with four children. I have four children, and had one nanny. Her mother lives with her, but I bet there are also nannies. Any time I look at her social media it seems like they have tons of random people hanging around their house. I want to know how many are on payroll.

It is none of your business. Try to absorb that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m assuming it’s the timing- she wanted another and started making steps towards surrogacy but then also got pregnant

The other baby is older. So the timing would have been intentional. She was already pregnant and wanted another.

No, she laid it out in her post. They were working with two surrogates because they wanted two more kids. Then she decided to try one more time to have a baby on her own - got pregnant. Surrogate got pregnant and then miscarried. Surrogate had to have surgery before trying again, got pregnant again when Chrissy was 5 months along. Baby she carried is born, then baby the surrogate carried is born.

It's way outside my family-planning mindset, but it's not intentional timing any more than using a surrogate at all would be intentional timing. They intended to have the first pregnancy make it to term.

Right, so it was very intentional. She was already pregnant wanted another. Like I said.

You said "the timing" was intentional. Considering they lost a pregnancy with the surrogate, you are making a bizarre claim. They *intended* for the first pregnancy with the surrogate to lead to a baby, which would not have been this month. But yes, the fact that they had a baby with a surrogate was intentional, and was in process before she got pregnant.

Of course it is. There is no accident when your surrogate becomes pregnant. Do you know what intentional means or how surrogacy works?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m assuming it’s the timing- she wanted another and started making steps towards surrogacy but then also got pregnant

The other baby is older. So the timing would have been intentional. She was already pregnant and wanted another.

No, she laid it out in her post. They were working with two surrogates because they wanted two more kids. Then she decided to try one more time to have a baby on her own - got pregnant. Surrogate got pregnant and then miscarried. Surrogate had to have surgery before trying again, got pregnant again when Chrissy was 5 months along. Baby she carried is born, then baby the surrogate carried is born.

It's way outside my family-planning mindset, but it's not intentional timing any more than using a surrogate at all would be intentional timing. They intended to have the first pregnancy make it to term.

Right, so it was very intentional. She was already pregnant wanted another. Like I said.

You said "the timing" was intentional. Considering they lost a pregnancy with the surrogate, you are making a bizarre claim. They *intended* for the first pregnancy with the surrogate to lead to a baby, which would not have been this month. But yes, the fact that they had a baby with a surrogate was intentional, and was in process before she got pregnant.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m assuming it’s the timing- she wanted another and started making steps towards surrogacy but then also got pregnant

The other baby is older. So the timing would have been intentional. She was already pregnant and wanted another.

No, she laid it out in her post. They were working with two surrogates because they wanted two more kids. Then she decided to try one more time to have a baby on her own - got pregnant. Surrogate got pregnant and then miscarried. Surrogate had to have surgery before trying again, got pregnant again when Chrissy was 5 months along. Baby she carried is born, then baby the surrogate carried is born.

It's way outside my family-planning mindset, but it's not intentional timing any more than using a surrogate at all would be intentional timing. They intended to have the first pregnancy make it to term.

Right, so it was very intentional. She was already pregnant wanted another. Like I said.

Good for them! She carried 4 of her 5 children. They had to bury one. They are wealthy enough that they could try multiple avenue's after her miscarriage. She knew how many children she wanted, and was able to make that happen. Who cares? I always laugh when people judge just by pictures posted on the internet. Like you have a clue what was actually going on when that was taken.

Anonymous wrote:Sweet Jesus, going from 2 to 4 kids in 6 months time will be hard, and children who are 5 months apart will be harder in some ways than twins. I guess things like this are doable if you’re rich. Congrats to them.

I have friends who couldn't decide which of them would carry their baby (lesbians, obvs) so they both got inseminated the same cycle, thinking they'd let fate make the call. They ended up both getting pregnant and giving birth one day apart. Seemed nuts to me (what if one or both deliveries went badly? You've got a postpartum mom taking care of 2 babies and another postpartum mom?), but it's been a decade and they made it through.

People make all kinds of choices that I wouldn't make, even when they're not rich.

Sweet Jesus, going from 2 to 4 kids in 6 months time will be hard, and children who are 5 months apart will be harder in some ways than twins. I guess things like this are doable if you’re rich. Congrats to them.

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.

I’m assuming it’s the timing- she wanted another and started making steps towards surrogacy but then also got pregnant

The other baby is older. So the timing would have been intentional. She was already pregnant and wanted another.

No, she laid it out in her post. They were working with two surrogates because they wanted two more kids. Then she decided to try one more time to have a baby on her own - got pregnant. Surrogate got pregnant and then miscarried. Surrogate had to have surgery before trying again, got pregnant again when Chrissy was 5 months along. Baby she carried is born, then baby the surrogate carried is born.

It's way outside my family-planning mindset, but it's not intentional timing any more than using a surrogate at all would be intentional timing. They intended to have the first pregnancy make it to term.

I just want to know how MANY nannies they have with four children. I have four children, and had one nanny. Her mother lives with her, but I bet there are also nannies. Any time I look at her social media it seems like they have tons of random people hanging around their house. I want to know how many are on payroll.

Good for them. I can never understand women that are jealous of other women.