Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But their parents did not desire 20 kids. They were open to however many kids God gave them. In their case, it happened to be 20. They were exceptionally fertile. But 99.9999% of families who are open to life have nowhere near as many children. That's applying a contraceptive mentality to the way being open to life actually plays out. The contraceptive mentality says "I am in control.". The open to life mentality says "God is in control."

Most open to life families in my community have 5-7 children. Many have lost children to miscarriage. Many more have adopted, because their own fertility was compromised. Truly large families are exceptional. Not because the parents desired a certain number; that's just the way God shaped their families.

If you watched the show you would know that this is a crock. Michelle and Jim Bob actively tried to have as many kids as possible. She tracks her fertility to an extent that the older girls know when she's ovulating. They showed the family calendar once in an earlier episode and her cycle was on there, and one of the girls was encouraging her to take a pregnancy test. I don't call that "leaving it up to God" as they claim.

Yes. She also weans her babies relatively early so as to return to a fertile state asap. She tracks her cycles on the family refrigerator.

That is not "open to life"; that is seeking pregnancy.

I stand corrected! I did not know they sought out pregnancy. Sounds like the opposite equivalent of trying NOT to get pregnant, then?

That is not being open to life, exactly. Like when I go to the doctor, and they ask "Are you trying to avoid or achieve pregnancy?". And I respond, "neither! I just want to be healthy!". They never know what to make of that. That's just letting things be. But doing everything possible to maximize fertility is the opposite extreme to doing everything possible to minimize it.

Interesting.

Please: How can the Dugger kids just leave? The parents have control of their life.

It is like being an abused wife. Easier said than done.

Anonymous wrote:

Truly large families are exceptional. Not because the parents desired a certain number; that's just the way God shaped their families.

Oooooohhhhh. I just popped some popcorn in anticipation of the responses THIS is going to generate. tee hee

I did not mean exceptional as in superior; rather, exceptional as in rare.

There is a disconnect. When my entire family would be out at the beach or some other public place (I'm the oldest of 10), people would ask my mom, "how many do you WANT?!". Because that is the question most people ask themselves when considering family size: What do I want?

That is not the question we ask. As faithful Catholics, it is "What does God want?"

Now, some couples who are open to life hope for a very large family, while others hope for a smaller family. But even those who personally desire many, many children are not in control. They can even try to maximize fertility by limiting breast feeding and losing the baby weight quickly, but they are still not in control. For a couple to have 20 children, they need to be EXTRAORDINARILY fertile and healthy.

That is all I meant. The idea that you can order up a huge family is fallacious. That's out of anyone's control.

If I could control my fertility, I'd have Irish twins every year

Anonymous wrote:

But their parents did not desire 20 kids. They were open to however many kids God gave them. In their case, it happened to be 20. They were exceptionally fertile. But 99.9999% of families who are open to life have nowhere near as many children. That's applying a contraceptive mentality to the way being open to life actually plays out. The contraceptive mentality says "I am in control.". The open to life mentality says "God is in control."

Most open to life families in my community have 5-7 children. Many have lost children to miscarriage. Many more have adopted, because their own fertility was compromised. Truly large families are exceptional. Not because the parents desired a certain number; that's just the way God shaped their families.

If you watched the show you would know that this is a crock. Michelle and Jim Bob actively tried to have as many kids as possible. She tracks her fertility to an extent that the older girls know when she's ovulating. They showed the family calendar once in an earlier episode and her cycle was on there, and one of the girls was encouraging her to take a pregnancy test. I don't call that "leaving it up to God" as they claim.

Yes. She also weans her babies relatively early so as to return to a fertile state asap. She tracks her cycles on the family refrigerator.

That is not "open to life"; that is seeking pregnancy.

But their parents did not desire 20 kids. They were open to however many kids God gave them. In their case, it happened to be 20. They were exceptionally fertile. But 99.9999% of families who are open to life have nowhere near as many children. That's applying a contraceptive mentality to the way being open to life actually plays out. The contraceptive mentality says "I am in control.". The open to life mentality says "God is in control."

Most open to life families in my community have 5-7 children. Many have lost children to miscarriage. Many more have adopted, because their own fertility was compromised. Truly large families are exceptional. Not because the parents desired a certain number; that's just the way God shaped their families.

If you watched the show you would know that this is a crock. Michelle and Jim Bob actively tried to have as many kids as possible. She tracks her fertility to an extent that the older girls know when she's ovulating. They showed the family calendar once in an earlier episode and her cycle was on there, and one of the girls was encouraging her to take a pregnancy test. I don't call that "leaving it up to God" as they claim.

Truly large families are exceptional. Not because the parents desired a certain number; that's just the way God shaped their families.

Oooooohhhhh. I just popped some popcorn in anticipation of the responses THIS is going to generate. tee hee

Anonymous wrote:To the PP - there is nothing wrong worth a life consisting of a hard days work for men and motherhood for the women if that is what they want. The problem here is there are no choices. If a boy is given a chance to go to college - with parents paying or even just parents or a school guiding the process and providing info but no money - and he chooses to be a tow truck driver, that is fine. Here there are no choices beyond motherhood or manual labor because the kids don't seem to have the basic education that you would need to manage even a retail store.

I think we are not going to see the oldest girls orevenboys having as many kids as their parents. I can see them ending up with large families of 7-9 kids, not 20 because they have had to do so much child rearing and bear so much cost - financial and lack of attention -due to their parents' desire for 20 kids. They may not subject themselves to it again.

But their parents did not desire 20 kids. They were open to however many kids God gave them. In their case, it happened to be 20. They were exceptionally fertile. But 99.9999% of families who are open to life have nowhere near as many children. That's applying a contraceptive mentality to the way being open to life actually plays out. The contraceptive mentality says "I am in control.". The open to life mentality says "God is in control."

Most open to life families in my community have 5-7 children. Many have lost children to miscarriage. Many more have adopted, because their own fertility was compromised. Truly large families are exceptional. Not because the parents desired a certain number; that's just the way God shaped their families.

Anonymous wrote:To the PP - there is nothing wrong worth a life consisting of a hard days work for men and motherhood for the women if that is what they want. The problem here is there are no choices. If a boy is given a chance to go to college - with parents paying or even just parents or a school guiding the process and providing info but no money - and he chooses to be a tow truck driver, that is fine. Here there are no choices beyond motherhood or manual labor because the kids don't seem to have the basic education that you would need to manage even a retail store.

I think we are not going to see the oldest girls orevenboys having as many kids as their parents. I can see them ending up with large families of 7-9 kids, not 20 because they have had to do so much child rearing and bear so much cost - financial and lack of attention -due to their parents' desire for 20 kids. They may not subject themselves to it again.

+1.

I have no issue with homeschooling. I know lots of homeschoolers and as far as I can tell, they are doing a great job and their kids are learning and making plans for their future.

The Duggar kids have been deprived of a bona fide education. Their "schooling" has been minimal (in fact, the older kids are now HS'ing the younger ones; Michelle is pretty much checked out) and the result is that their options are severely limited. Combine that with the cult they are in (and make no mistake, ATI is a cult) and well, it is a grim situation for them.

Here is a first-person account of the ATI experience:

www.recoveringgrace.org/2011/08/grace-and-culture/

And other commentary on whether ATI is a cult:

www.widewhite.org/2010/09/cult-of-quiverfull-ati-vision-forum/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BS, these girls are in AMERICA they can pack and leave whenever they want to.

These girls are not exposed to AMERICA. They are sheltered to the nth degree and told that their purpose in life is to serve and procreate. Even if one of them chose to leave, where would she go, what would she do, to whom would she turn? They only socialize with their own kind. These kids do not have any connections to people other than those in ATI. They have no skills which would enable them to support themselves.

They are, basically, in a similar situation to what a battered wife is in.

BS. They went to school they can go flip hamburgers anywhere and pay rent. They can be a live in nanny with all that experience. It's AMERICA they're free to do whatever they want and they know that.

To the PP - there is nothing wrong worth a life consisting of a hard days work for men and motherhood for the women if that is what they want. The problem here is there are no choices. If a boy is given a chance to go to college - with parents paying or even just parents or a school guiding the process and providing info but no money - and he chooses to be a tow truck driver, that is fine. Here there are no choices beyond motherhood or manual labor because the kids don't seem to have the basic education that you would need to manage even a retail store.

I think we are not going to see the oldest girls orevenboys having as many kids as their parents. I can see them ending up with large families of 7-9 kids, not 20 because they have had to do so much child rearing and bear so much cost - financial and lack of attention -due to their parents' desire for 20 kids. They may not subject themselves to it again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:C9BL, no one is criticizing your lifestyle, we are criticizing the Duggars' lifestyle. But if you think the Duggar girls are being raised to be financially independent, you have been sniffing something other than "stinky diapers."

This. They are bright and capable and hardworking but have been raised to be barefoot and pregnant and dependent and submissive. It is a crime, a form of child abuse IMO to deny your children the opportunity to pursue careers, financial independence and options other than the ones you might want for them.

I have never watched the show, so I honestly don't know how this works: do the parents forbid their grown children to attend college or work outside the home? If so, how is that enforced? Or is it just that they raise their boys to value being businessmen more than college-educated, and their girls to value being mothers more than any other profession?

Or is it a belief that homeschooling itself precludes higher education or advanced careers?

Many of the comments collapse various opinions into one, generic anti-Duggar one, so it is hard to pull apart the actual facts of their upbringing from the outrage at said upbringing. I would like to hear exactly how the older children are being held back by their parents, though.

--C9BL again

PS. I'm sorry if I was ranting and raving a bit...I'm taking a medication right now that makes me kind of extra crazy, with a capital C. Even though I know that, objectively, I still start to unravel sometimes.

I have 2 friends that are from different families of 12+ and they enjoy it. I agree that they may not have gotten enough mommy time when they were little but they were loved just as much. Both of them were older and helped raise the younger ones- they had more responsibilities than most kids their age but still had plenty of time to do sports and hang out with friends. Fwiw, their moms were more calm than my mom of 2.

Anonymous wrote:BS, these girls are in AMERICA they can pack and leave whenever they want to.

These girls are not exposed to AMERICA. They are sheltered to the nth degree and told that their purpose in life is to serve and procreate. Even if one of them chose to leave, where would she go, what would she do, to whom would she turn? They only socialize with their own kind. These kids do not have any connections to people other than those in ATI. They have no skills which would enable them to support themselves.

They are, basically, in a similar situation to what a battered wife is in.

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Who are any of us to decide what values a family should pass on to their children? Maybe she disagrees with your lifestyle as much as you disagree with hers. Personally, I want my children to walk through the world with love and an open mind. Most of you have shown. One of that here. Granted, she put herself and family on TV so she opens herself up to it. I just find this thread narcissistic and ironic.

She can have whatever lifestyle she wants, I have no opinion on that. What I object to is her decision to structure their girls' education so as to render them incapable of supporting themselves, on purpose. That's not about lifestyle, it is about incapacitating your children.

By agreeing to be a public figure, she has consented to public criticism.

Wow. Who are any of us to decide what values a family should pass on to their children? Maybe she disagrees with your lifestyle as much as you disagree with hers. Personally, I want my children to walk through the world with love and an open mind. Most of you have shown. One of that here. Granted, she put herself and family on TV so she opens herself up to it. I just find this thread narcissistic and ironic.