AnimationCelebritiesFilm IndustryMoviesTV

The Duggars Are an Extremely Dysfunctional Family

Updated on April 19, 2016

Joined: 6 years agoFollowers: 586Articles: 425
What is with the Duggars? Nineteen children, really now.
What is with the Duggars? Nineteen children, really now.

19 Children? When is Enough, ENOUGH?

It is IMPOSSIBLE or NEAR IT for parents to give individualized attention to 19 children.However, THIS does not faze the Duggars one bit. They have children without considering the ramifications it has on the rest of the children in the family.
It is IMPOSSIBLE or NEAR IT for parents to give individualized attention to 19 children.However, THIS does not faze the Duggars one bit. They have children without considering the ramifications it has on the rest of the children in the family.
What about the other children? What are THEY thinking?It is evident that these children are not receiving the individualized parental attention they need.
What about the other children? What are THEY thinking?It is evident that these children are not receiving the individualized parental attention they need.
In the Duggar family as with the majority of large and very large families, it is the OLDEST/OLDER children who raise the younger children, NEVER THE PARENTS.
In the Duggar family as with the majority of large and very large families, it is the OLDEST/OLDER children who raise the younger children, NEVER THE PARENTS.
The Duggar children have no privacy, they have to live on top of each other.The concept of privacy and individual space is nonexistent in the Duggar and in many large and very large families.
The Duggar children have no privacy, they have to live on top of each other.The concept of privacy and individual space is nonexistent in the Duggar and in many large and very large families.
The Duggars are adherents to the Quiverfull vement which totally eschews any method of birth control.
The Duggars are adherents to the Quiverfull vement which totally eschews any method of birth control.

Anyone Who Has 19 Children Is Severely Mentally Ill

There is a television program on TLC Discovery Channel which centers around an Arkansas couple called the Duggars. They are the parents of an extremely large family. They presently have a total of nineteen children. Yes, nineteen children! You heard me correctly!

The Duggars are an anomaly in this day and age of scrupulous family planning. They are adherents of the fanatical religious sect, the Quiverfull Movement. This movement espouses no form of birth control and to have as many children as " God sends you". However, during her early years of marriage, Michelle Duggar used birth control;and she miscarried.

When the Duggars started to have children, they elected not to use any type of contraception but to let it rip. The philosophy of the Duggars are the children are wealth, a blessing, and the more the merrier. They assert that their large family is indeed a blessing.

Is it really? Let's study the situation. Before their television show and book earned them millions of dollars, the children lived cramped together in a very small house . However, they live in a slightly large house since their television show. Their children's bedroom is a dormitory-like setting with multiple bunk beds. They have no privacy at all. To top all this, they have to schedule time with their parents WEEKS ahead.

Their older children have no childhoods at all. They function as primary caregivers and it is mandatory that they raise their younger siblings. Their parents do not raise the children at all. However, the Duggars INTEND to have more children. This does not make sense to most educated, normal, and intelligent people. ,We have been educated to know that when a person becomes a parent, it is their responsibility to raise their children, not the other children in the family. If a parent is affluent enough, he/she usually hires an au pair and/or a nanny to help raise their children.

Although the Duggars have money to hire nannies and au pairs to raise their children, they elect not to do so. Instead they have their oldest children consigned to slave labor status as handmaidens and servants to their younger siblings. Psychologists decry parents who have children raise other children. Psychological studies state the children do not have the maturity nor the development to raise other children. The studies assert that the raising of children is an ADULT responsibility, not ANOTHER CHILD'S responsibility. I concur with those studies. An older sibling raise a younger siblings constitutes child abuse.

Furthermore, many women, including Michelle Duggar, have an inordinate amount of children because of "baby hunger". Psychological and sociological studies maintain that there are many women who continuously get pregnant because they crave infants. Once their children leave infancy, they miss this and have another child. This is a form of mental illness. These psychologically challenged women continue to have children, oftentimes to the neglect of the older children in the family. This is what Michelle Duggar is doing. She is neglecting the older children to continuously have children to satisfy her "baby hunger".

It is evident that the oldest children in the family are neglected and relegated to the status of servants to the parents and younger siblings. Most rationally minded parents stop at one or two children because they believe that it all they can care for emotional and psychologically. Financial affordability is not the only factor in deciding how many children a couple has Emotional availability should be another factor. Just because a couple is highly affluent it does not give them a license to have a large family. Psychological and sociological studies authenticate that as family size increases, parents are unable to invest much emotional time in the caring of their children.

To state it succinctly, the Duggars are UNABLE to care for their children. Yet, the Duggars indicated that they wanted a twentieth child. This is totally insane. They do not even take care of the other nineteen they have. They have it very easy as parents. That job is done by their oldest children. There was one segment of the series in which the oldest daughters wanted to travel but the mother forbade it because she wanted them to look after her infant child

The Duggars are a selfish, narcissistic couple in need in of a good psychiatrist. They do not care about their children at all. They just have children because they want to satisfy their "baby hunger" instead of intelligent planning for the amount of children they can PROPERLY care for. The Duggars are not to be praised but to be pitied. They seriously should undergo intense psychiatric treatment as there is definitely something amiss with them.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Colleen 6 years ago

      The family lives in Arkansas.

    • Marina 6 years ago

      What is also troubling about the Duggar family is their strict adherence to stereotypical gender roles when it come to the "jurisdictions" and childcare. The four older daughters have a ridiculous amount of responsibility and seem to be the primary caregivers to the younger children. They also seem to do ALL of the cooking, or rather as is the Duggar style, heating up canned and processed food and also seem to be the ones responsible for all cleaning and laundry. Michelle seems to nothing in that house but care for the youngest child. The parents also claim to live debt free and that they built their new house without incurring any debt but the truth is that TLC paid for the house to be finished, for the furnishings and decorating and for the massive, expensive grand piano. We could all be totally debt free if a tv network was footing the bill for us. When they had to pay for themselves, they lived in extremely cramped quarters. Also, those children do not have the opportunity for any further education at all. The oldest son runs a used car lot, the next son has a towing business. Did neither consider college? The three oldest daughters are long out of high school, why are they still at home every day caring for kids instead of pursuing some sort of education or any kind of life outside of that household. Their volunteering at the fire hall in a pair (heaven forbid they have an interest that would allow them to be alone)is not the same as pursuing solo efforts that interest them. I agree with the "baby craving" observation. Michelle Duggar seems to fit this completely and Jim Bob's quiverfull beliefs perpetuate this. How people do not see how disturbing this is is beyond me.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 6 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Dear Marina, I agree wholeheartedly with you. In large families, the parents do not raise the children. It is the older children, who give up their childhoods, to raise the younger children. This is why small families are best for the development of children's needs and potentials and for family life as well. Good point, Marina.

    • Monisajda profile image

      Monisajda 5 years ago from my heart

      The comment on "infant craving" was interesting, I didn't know about it. Thanks.

    • Melanie 5 years ago

      They are not from Arizona but Arkansas. Either you made a huge typo, have no geographical sense, or did very little research...

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Melanie: Thank you. Big mistake- I meant Arkansas, not Arizona. I did not know what I was thinking that day! Thank you again.

    • bill 5 years ago

      these people are disgusting

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To bill: Thank you for your input. I have news to share: Michelle Duggar is having her TWENTIETH child. When will IT ALL stop! When!

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 5 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      Now tell me, HOW exactly are they hurting anyone? That is one of the happiest families I have seen on this crazy world of reality TV.

      Crazy or not, they are supporting their own way, they are not sticking their hand of for government assistence.

      Those kids are NOT deprived or mistreated, just because YOU think they should be able to do things YOU think they should.

      It is THEIR buisness, in my opinion, and as long as they are not hurting others....more power to them.

    • Darren 5 years ago

      @CMerritt

      They are hurting someone they are hurting Michelle's body and the older children I find it astonishing cps has yet to step in and stop this madness.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Darren: I could not have agreed with you more. Thank you so much for stopping by and submitting your input. I, too, feel that CPS should investigate this! However, this is not within their purview as the children "appear to be well-taken care off".

    • joanne 5 years ago

      Surely the older children will finally realise that they are being exploited by their parents and could sue them for this. They've abdicated from the complexity of educating their own children about values to the older ones. Seriously worrying that this is seen as a 'model' family. If they're ever open to it it's going to take years of psychological intervention.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Thank you Joanne for your enlightening statement. Of course, the oldest children are exploited; however, they are so brainwashed into the Duggar groupthink consensus that they believe that this lifestyle is the only valid one. They are so indoctrinated that they will never realize the depth of this abuse until there is psychological intervention. Many people who came from large families are in denial regarding the situation of their families. They voice how "happy" they are even though they grew up in the most hardscrabble psychosocial situation. Again, thank you for stopping by.

    • Darren 5 years ago

      Joanne we can only wish that would happen I am astonished that they don't pay taxes get anything large for the house from their sponsors for free get sudsidies(I apologize for the incorrect spelling) from the government for their "church" the Large pay check from TLC and yet they get their clothing from thrift stores. taking up large quantity of those items away from people that actually need to shop in thrift stores. I feel that if their children pull the same crap they have the US government is going to step in and do what the chineese government has done limit families to having 1 child each.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 5 years ago

      They are endangering the safety of their children by having too many to safely supervise. I watched a few episodes and in a 1/2 hour show, I saw one child about 8 chewing on the end of a crutch. He had the entire rubber end inside his mouth. The germs were one thing but the end could have come off and he could have choked, by the time anyone got to that poor kid he would be dead.

      Another child, a small girl of about 4 yrs old was vomiting violently and one of the older girls was trying to help her throw up. The child was crying for "mommy" but mommy was no where in sight. The child finally laid on the couch writhing in pain. No blanket, no pillow, no stuffed cuddly. No adult came to check on the child, no one took her temperature. She was left to fend for herself.

      An infant less than a few months old was left in the care of one of the older children who apparently left her face down on the dirty floor when they all went outside to play on their makeshift slip and slide devised by "dad" which consisted of plastic tarp, dish soap and water. No helmets, no safety instructions just "come on down and slide" mass chaos.

      I do not see any toys in the house at all. There is no education going on and these kids stick to their own family for socializing or worse yet, only socialize with other misfit families from their messed up "church". As a result, the children are socially retarded and very unaccepting of anyone different from them. Sad. Where is Child Services??

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Askme: This is so true what you have stated. The Duggars are not the only neglectful parents of large families. The average large family is that way. Parents who have so many children that they are not supervised properly- let us say, totally unsupervised.

      Many children of large families are subjected to benign neglect to say the least. They are left to raise themselves and suffer the effects of neglect. I have NEVER met any child from a large family who received adequate attention. In fact, it was quite the opposite, children from large families are often neglected by their parents and left to their own devices. The culture of the large family is totally dysfunctional and pathological to say the least. Askme, you are a person after my own heart. I believe that parents should have from 1-3 children to adequately raise them and to provide financially beyond the subsistence level.

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 5 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      come on guys.........they are healthy and happy kids. What makes you think the Gov should be able to step in and tell them how many kids we can or cannot have?.........is this Amerika?

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Askme: I totally agree with you. It is not only the Duggars who neglect their own children, it is the average parents of a large families. These parents unthinkingly have more children than they can adequately care for.

      Many children of large families raise themselves and are left to their own devices. They do not receive the parental care and attention that children from small families receive. Children from large families are often feral in their attitude as a result of little or no parental supervision.

      As I have said before, the large family is dysfunctional and pathological. Children born into such families receive the short end of the stick. They are impoverished, low academic achievers, and tend to gravitate to deleterious activities because of parental neglect. Askme, you are a person after my own heart. Your premise is enlightening and intellect. People should not have anymore than 2 children in order to adequately raise and educate them.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Those children are not healthy. They are neglected as the average child in a large family is. They have no parental supervision and are left to raise themselves. Yes, Child Services should step into the Duggar household- these people are monsters, not parents!

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 5 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      WOW!

      that is about all I can say to that.

      we gotta agree to disagree....stongly.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 5 years ago

      CMerritt: Healthy and happy kids? eh...only time will tell. Odds are tho' the Duggar kids will end up much like other children who were on TV at an early age, depressed, substance abusers. Having a camera follow you around recording your every move, is not normal. I've seen the Duggar children, the really young ones, roused from sleeping at 4am so they could make an appearance on the Today show or other promotional spots. To wake a sleeping child and deprive them of much needed sleep is very wrong and unhealthy.

      The Duggar kids emotional needs are not being met. The older kids are nothing more than indentured servants and the younger ones are marketing tools for this dysfunctional reality show.

      The girl children are being taught they are nothing more than baby making machines and being deprived of an education.

      The klan does not associate with anyone of a different race, religion or beliefs making these children unable to appreciate or understand diversity in society.

      The Duggar kids are "home schooled" but I see little schooling going on when I watch the show. The children are left to themselves mostly. And, what education does Michelle Duggar have that that makes her a skillful teacher?

      These kids are not being raised to be independent, self sufficient adults but more like little clones of their parents.

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 5 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      can you prove ONE thing that you just stated?

      I don't think you can. I think you are merely speculating. And sticking your nose into someone elses business.....If there was an ounce of proof of anything wrong........they would have already lost those kids.........they are on National TV for gosh sakes.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 5 years ago

      "Prove it" what's to prove? Paul Peterson, Patty Duke, Todd Bridges just to name a few of children who grew up before the cameras and grew into adults with emotional issues. We do not yet know the impact of childhood reality stars.

      It is a contradiction to forbid your children (as the Duggars do) from watching television to being on television. Can only imagine the conflicting information the children are getting.

      "sticking my nose in someone else's business" that is just too funny. I am not the one who opened up my personal business for a national reality show. I am pretty sure the Michelle and Jim Bob are not as naïve as they appear. Once you agree to let cameras into your life, you pretty much give up playing the "none of your business" card!

      As far as the government and child services, YES this is America. The land that came up with civil rights, work place laws and put an end to child labor. It is our duty as a peaceful kind nation to object mistreatment of the weak. Child who do not have a voice and no say in what their parents subject on to them do need government to protect them~same as animals.

      The Duggar parents subscribe to the Michael Pearl method of child rearing which is to spank, beat your children into submission and only allow for a "happy" emotion and NEVER any other emotion like sadness, anger, etc. That is why the Duggar kids never have any expression other than a phony happy look. The same empty fake expressions their hypocrite parent wear.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Askme: I totally agree with your premise. In all large families, the oldest child ALWAYS raise their younger siblings thus forfeiting their own childhoods and adolescence. The Duggars are typical parents of large families. They are not the only parents of large families who neglect their children- an overwhelming majority of parents who have large families neglect/abuse their children in one way or another! However, if CMerritt chooses to disagree with you, please let him and do not argue. Mr. Merritt has his opinion as you have yours. Please do not argue with him regarding your premise on this hub. I welcome your premise as I welcome his. Thank you kindly!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 5 years ago

      Will do gm. For the record tho', think it was he who was arguing by asking me to "prove it" or saying I am "speculating" and "sticking my nose into someone else's business". Not arguing, just stating my opinion. Thank you.

    • Bridget Hainline 4 years ago

      I saw another kind of neglect when the Duggars allowed 11 year old Jason to run around like crazy by that 12 foot drop into the orchestra pit. The kid fell into it and because of the lack of a mature grown-up saying to him, "Jason, cool it. Someone's gonna get hurt," he fell into it and banged himself up pretty bad. If fate would have played out differently, this boy could have died and Jim-Bob and Michelle would have been crucified and have their children taken from them. I also agree with the top poster who said that someone should have taken care of the vomiting Johannah and maybe give her tea, butter less toast, and ginger ale.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Bridget: Parents cannot adequate care for a large family. There are going to be some children who will be neglected, overlooked, and etc. in large to very large families. What happened to the Duggar children is very apropros in large to very large families. Children in large to very large families often fare worse than those in small families who are usually cared for and supervised by both parents. In small families, the children are either equal or outnumbered by the parents; in large to very large families, the children OUTNUMBER the parents. It is just simple mathematics- children in large to very large families are NOT going to get the care, attention, and supervision that children in small families receive!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Bridget: I totally concur. The Duggars are not the only ones. Children in large to very large families are often not adequately cared for, supervised, and paid attention to by their parents. Parents in large to very large families often express bewilderment and perplexity regarding the ability to care for their children. That is why the OLDEST child or children are compelled to raise and care for their younger siblings thus forfeiting their OWN childhoods and adolescence.

      Children in large to very large families tend to be ignored, overlooked, and uncared for. It is a total impossibility for parents to care for a large brood of children. This is why children in large to very large families often fare worse than children in small families. Many children in large to very large families, although they are in DEEP DENIAL ABOUT THIS ISSUE, are often needy as adults and many become quite territorial because they are not brought up with individuation as children.

      Children in small families receive MORE care and attention than children from large to very large families. Children in small families are equal in number and/or outnumbered by their parents. In large to very large families, children OUTNUMBER the parents-this is simple mathematical logic. There is no way that parents in large to very large families can adequate care for their children. Any person who states that they can, are totally delusional to say the least.

    • ranny 4 years ago

      Although I agree with you that the older Duggar kids shouldn't be raising the younger kids, this is not true of all large families. Yes they may have to pitch in more but most older siblings enjoy helping out (helping not doing it all) look after the younger children. Also families of 5 or 6 often are very loved abd get adequate care even though they out number the parents.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 4 years ago

      Agree in "some" large families older children enjoy helping out but I think it depends on the age of the older children. Like an 8 year old probably loves carrying around their baby sis or bro but when the older child enters puberty and starts developing into teen years, friends, separating from parents and should be forming their own identity, I think some older children can start resenting caring for siblings.

      I also agree 5 ot 6 children can be very loved and get adequate attention. That number of children is not extreme or difficult to give attention to although it is kind of unheard of in this day and age. This 19 children and procreating until you cannot procreate anymore is what I find objectionable. The Duggar parents seem to have no filters, no common sense, no concern. The attitude of "God will provide" is one thing but my thought is God made you with brains, free will and common sense. You should exercise those gifts and not put this on God.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To askme: Thank God for you. I mean this sincerely. Finally, a person after my own heart. I totally concur with you regarding this premise. In my opinion, many oldest children resent looking after their younger siblings. How do I know this? I have encountered many oldest siblings of large families who actually resented their parents for having more children than they can reasonably take care of; furthermore, they resented( I heard this many times) giving up their individual lives to look after younger siblings. That is why many oldest daughters of large families leave home as soon as they can to get away from their chattel, slave like status. This applies to oldest sons but less so! Oldest sons in large to very large families usually have more freedom than oldest daughters in large to very large families. Askme, I always welcome your comments and always feel free to stop by ANYTIME!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 4 years ago

      Oh thank you so much GM for valuing my opinions! I value yours as well and your intelligent, common sense view of things. Such a rarity to have both!

    • Coloratura 4 years ago

      I completely agree with your assessment of the Duggar family. As a university student studying psychology, I've watched several episodes of their show in horror. I saw one brief scene showing the older girls shopping for clothing. They remarked they shopped around for deals and bought things for the others. However, it almost seemed contrived as though the producers had told them to do this as a compromise. After all, one can't have the family looking too odd, and there needs to be some indication they're not totally out of touch with the real world. Otherwise, people wouldn't watch the show.

      I hope to the gods this train wreck will be halted before it even has a chance to start. Many may defend their way of life to the bitter end, but there are some ideologies which are inherently harmful. I'm perfectly content to let people put themselves in difficult situations, so they can play the role of martyr. However, I think it's almost criminal for people to continue living in willful ignorance of the potential consequences which may befall the Duggars' kids.

      Very sad and frightening.

    • Christy 4 years ago

      The Duggars are very scary. They use physical punishments but hide it from the cameras. Their blanket training consnsit of placng a child, usually 15 to 18 months on a blanket. Luring the child off the blanket and then slapping their hand with a ruler for moving off. This was per Michelle in one of her earlier interviews. When a child leaves a room for discipline or because they are upset, when they come back with JimBob they are visibly upset. Like Josias and the latest pregnancy announcement. Anna will follow right along with what Michelle does since her wanting to belong and please Josh far outweighs her love for her children.

      Sadly none will get to move out an dattend college and have choices in life, unless they run away under darkness.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Christy: Thank you for your comments and enlightening me regarding the punishments of the children. Oh dear, I learn something every day from people's commentary. Thank you for relaying this information. Always feel free to stop by.

    • Marina 4 years ago

      To the commenter claiming the children are healthy and happy. Look past the surface. They belong to a Christian CULT. Showing negative emotions are considered an act of rebellion and direct disobedience to your parents. Is that true happiness? No. Having a robotic smile plastered on your face 24/7 because no other emotion is allowed to be shown is in no way healthy. It is brainwashing and a form of abuse. The infants share a room with their adult sisters who are therefore responsible for getting up at night with them. All while Michelle is working out and taking poser naps during the day when the older daughters are again caring for the younger children. I am sure the older female siblings could use a nap with all of the housework, food preparation and childcare responsibilities that have been dumped on them. Shouldn't it be Michelle or Jim Bob getting up in the middle of the night to change diapers, etc? Michelle and Jim Bob do very little of the parenting and having children raise their siblings is not healthy in any way, shape or form. In any family of any size, cooperation is required to keep things going smoothly but in the case of the Duggar's, the older daughters are deprived of having lives of their own so that their Mother can continue her prolific child bearing. That is beyond selfish. The Duggar's function an a unit and only as a unit. They seem to see their children as a whole brood and not as separate people. They generalize boys and girls behavior and career goals, or lack there of, as if there is only one formula for their lives. There is no room for individuality as they must all follow Jim Bob's vision for the family which seems to be focused on misogynistic gender roles and using TLC to push their religious beliefs down everyone's throats. Jubilee got more attention for having been miscarried than Jordyn has ever had in her life. The Duggar's seem far more interested in adding to their already huge family than they do in appreciating the children who already exist. Healthy and happy? Hardly. I have personal experience with ATI and IFBLP as I have family members who are deeply involved with this organization. The fact that TLC allows the sugar coating of their involvement with no mention of the controversy surrounding this group sickens me.

    • Marina 4 years ago

      I meant power naps and as a unit. This family and the fact they are held up as some sort of example of great parenting drives me to distraction as evidenced in my typos. Imagine having no identity other than the one your parents have imposed on you. Freedom of choice is not an option for the older daughters or for any of the children for that matter.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Marina: Amen a milnillion times. I totally concur with you, again, a milnillion times. Marina, you are very lucid and make absolute sense. You are indeed adding to the discussion and always feel free to stop by. The Duggars are both a dysfunctional and abusive family!

    • Marge 4 years ago

      I'm glad to see I am not alone in my disillusionment with this family. I have seen too many red flags and have crossed swords with Duggar fans more than once.

      I have been especially distressed by the complete disregard for Josie, the youngest who was born premature.

      Jim Bob and Michelle go on a mission to El Salvador and leave this child in the care of a sibling barely out of her teens. A child who spent months in intensive care and who is a medically fragile child. Not surprisingly, Josie became ill and seizured, requiring an overnite hospital stay. Michelle and JB could only snivel and whine about their "helplessness" and pray over the phone.

      Well, maybe you wouldn't be so helpless if you were home with this child like you should be! What was so important in El Salvador?

      You can see the video by googling "Josie Duggar seizure".

      I was appalled...then enraged. Didn't take long to dump Josie on an older sibling did it Michelle? Where the devil was the rest of the family? Why was Jill left to manage this situation alone?

      When Michelle was again pregnant, JB sat there smiling like the cat who ate the canary. Hey JB, what about the serious risk your wife is taking after nearly dying in her last pregnancy? How about the risk to her unborn child. Put simply, what the hell kind of a husband and father are you? What about the possiblity of your wife and unborn child dying in another bout of pre-eclampsia? What about the disruption..again...of your children's lives by another premature birth? What about the suffering of the child?

      I equate him with Rusty Yates, who's mentally ill wife drowned her five children. Had he been a responsible father and husband, those children would be alive. I hold him personally responsible for their deaths.

      Has anyone ever seen JB hold his chidren? I've never seen Michelle hold them either. Its always the daughters hauling the kids and diaper bags. Does JB give them baths, rock them, feed them, anything? Are the older boys expected to pitch in with household help and child care, or is that just "women's work"?

      The rigid control of every aspect of the children's lives. Do you see the children bring friends home or visit a friend's home? Do the daughters who are young women socialize with other young men and women their own ages? Do they just go out for an evening of fun with friends their own age?

      Lots of red flags here, and I've only scratched the surface.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Thank you Marge for your comments. They are greatly appreciated. This is not only the Duggars but the average large family. In large families, parents DO NOT raise their children, it is ALWAYS the oldest child and/or older children who raise their younger siblings thus forfeiting their childhood and adolescence. That is why I stated that the Duggars are a DYSFUNCTIONAL family. This is because in FUNCTIONAL families, parents have just enough children to effectively raise them, giving them individualized attention and granting the children a normal childhood and adolescence.

    • Marge 4 years ago

      Hello gmwilliams,

      I'm afraid that from personal experience, I can't agree this is typical of all large families. Growing up in a neighborhood where large families were the norm, I saw children who went to school, parochial or public, played with other children, dated, socially interacted with other children their own ages, and did not have parental responsibilities foisted on them. I also saw plenty of very dysfunctional small families, including the one I was raised in.

      Certainly children can help out, but foisting parental responsibilities onto children who are barely out of diapers themselves is deplorable. Michelle might call this her "buddy system", I see it for what it is.

      What I see with the Duggars is complete regimentation and control of every aspect of their children's lives.

      JimBob in my opinion is a tyrannical controller and Michelle is a self absorbed pregnancy junkie. As soon as one baby starts turning into a bothersome toddler, its time for another new baby.

      When I pointed out the serious risk another pregnancy meant for Michelle, good grief just ask any OB/GYN or do a little internet research, Michelle fans went ballistic. They trust God! Yeah, that's why Michelle sees a high risk OB, right? This "trust" seems highly selective. Also, didn't God give us a brain and judgment?

      I was appalled that a Saturday afternoon with dad is donning Hazmet suits and cleaning out a house abandoned by renters who were hoarders. What parent in their right mind would let their small children into such an environment infested with who knows what? That's why there are professionals who do this work JimBob.

      Young women like the very beautiful Duggar girls should be free to pursue education, social interaction with other young men and women, a life of their own. I mean, there are Christian colleges the young women could attend if that is the parents' concern. Instead all the children are relegated to the "Duggar compound" to satisfy the needs of the parents and maintain rigid control.

      In my opinion gmwilliams, this is the real problem and would exist whether this family was small or large.

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      I still think it is nobodys business how many kids they have, they are happy and healthy, that is clearly seen...they are not dependent off of the government.

    • Marge 4 years ago

      cmerritt,

      You don't put your business on TV and the internet, then cry that people shouldn't comment on it. The Duggars profit very well by making their business public. They got all that free professional help in building and decorating their home. I noticed the children were allowed to run around the construction site. The girls with their long hair around table saws etc. I wouldn't allow my small children in their father's workshop, but that's just me. Why would they need government assistance?

      Oh, and let's not forget the trip to the Holy Land, which I'm sure they had a little assistance with as well. Of course the girls were hauling around the younger children, wouldn't see JimBob or Michelle doing anything like that! Josie again became seriously ill on this trip. I don't know if Michelle checked ahead of time if adequate medical care would be available for Josie should the need arise. This is after all a child with an extensive medical history. Thankfully it was available.

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      Who said they are getting gov assistance?

      Why are YOU so concerned with this family?

      Don't watch the show, and move on.

      They are on National TV, if there was a HINT of child abuse, don't you think the experts would have called in the forces?

      I have only watched the show a few times, but to me, they appear VERY happy and extremely functionable. They live in a ver nice home, they are all very clean, and I find it interesting how they work together as a "family" to get things done.

      There are FAR worse issues going on beside the Duggar family.

      Just quit watching it...

      For the life of me, I do not understand those people who "hate" them....I can care less if they are capitalizing by this...it is THEIR choice to make. THEY have to live with any of the outcome from it.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Thank you Marge, you are one of the intelligent commentors on this hub. Come again please!

    • Marge 4 years ago

      cmerritt,

      I didn't say they were getting gov't assistance. Why would they need it?

      This family has put their business out there for the world to see and I am commenting. Why are YOU so concerned with them?

      I quit watching the show some time ago.

      Don't be so naïve concerning abuse. Life has taught me a few things, mainy all that glitters is not gold. Also, unless we look in people's living room windows, we have no idea what goes on in their lives. You will know only what people want you to, period. Let's put it this way cmerritt, have you ever been shocked to find out the "perfect" marriage was ending in divorce?

      I don't "hate" them in the least. Also, I do not accuse anyone of abuse. I am deeply disturbed by many red flags that I see and have concerns for the children. I have specified them in previous posts.

      I suspect CMerritt that I'm bringing up some things that are hitting a nerve with you. Take off the rose colored glasses. There is much about this whole situation that just does not sit well with me, and I'm not buying any of it.

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      Marge,

      Life has taught me a few lessons too, and that is to mind your ouwn business....you are right, Marge, it DOES strike a nerve with me. Not so much you, but others on here who find nothing better to do that BASH them. I understand that THEY took the risk on going on national TV...so they are kind of asking for it. Unless there is some sort of concrete evidence of "child abuse" which there is NOT. Just because they are different and are devout Christians, bothers the crap out some folks...it does not mean they are "DYSFUNCTIONAL"...they appear to be very "FUNCTIONAL". You don't have to "buy" anything...it is not your place to do so. Except don't watch them.

    • Marge 4 years ago

      cmerritt,

      Apparently one is minding their own business, when they like you, praise the Duggars. Let myself and others criticize them, and we need to mind our own business.

      To begin with, no one would know the first thing about the Duggar's business if they didn't tell the world. But then they profit nicely in the process. So CMerritt, maybe another lesson you need to learn is that when one makes their business public, they have to expect the criticism as well as the praise.

      That aside, I have never accused anyone of child abuse, I said I see red flags that I find very unsettling. Also, abuse takes many forms and are not always obvious so one cannot say that since there are no signs of abuse then there is no abuse. This statement doesn't suggest abuse is occuring.

      I don't for a minute believe this family is what they are portrayed to be and have stated just some of my reasons in previous posts. Other posters have done the same. This isn't "bashing". Its pointing out certain facts that apparently make you very uncomfortable.

      As for their devout Christianity, I have my reservations. Let's just say they may devoutly believe, but in my opinion, engage in activity that does not strike me as devout Christian parenting.

      They "appear" to be functional. That's the key word, "appear". I see too many things that are telling me different, and apparently other posters are as well.

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      Marge,

      First of all you are correct about them exposing themselves to a national audience, so criticism is to be expected.

      With that said, I find myself WANTING to defend them....

      It is when you say things like "This isn't "bashing"

      but the following things about them in this hub:

      “Anyone Who Has 19 Children Is Severely Mentally Ill”

      “The Duggars are a selfish, narcissistic couple in need in of a good psychiatrist.”

      “Those children are not healthy”

      “these people are monsters, not parents!”

      I see that as BASHING. Now I have no dog in the fight, I have only watched a few episodes. My daughter loves to watch the show. A friend of mine has used their homemade laudry detergent and swears by it....

      I realize you have your opinion and it is not my hub. I also am a follower gmwilliams, and I DO have respect for him...so, there you have it.

    • Marge 4 years ago

      CMerritt,

      Opinions are being expressed here. You may not like or agree with them. Fine. I don't necessarily consider all of these opinions "bashing". As with any subject, some people may get more intense than others. I'm sure we have all raised someone's ire for expressing an opposing opinion. I've gotten more than a few Duggar fans angry, and extremely emotional, with me.

      If you are a supporter of the family and enjoy their show, I have no issue with this. Go for it.

    • peechdoctor 4 years ago

      i cannot watch them. . . even the commercials creep me out . . i refer to jimbob as jimjones . . . or more than one occasion, watching the show made me have Jonestown nightmares . . . the truth always reveals itself, abd theirs is not going to be pretty . . .

    • reader 4 years ago

      The question has been posed, "How are they hurting others?" This is how (aside from leaving lifelong scars on their children):

      They are influencing others to have large families.

      -The others are not going to have TLC there to build and furnish a house.

      -They are not going to be able to declare their home a church.

      -They may not be able to homeschool depending upon the educational requirements of the home teacher in their state.

      -They are not going to have TV shows generating income (despite not wanting their kids to watch TV).

      -They are not going to have income-generating websites where they hawk their wares (despite not wanting their kids to use the internet).

      -They are not going to write books and make DVDs that will generate income from around the world.

      If the Duggar father were to fall ill, the income sources will keep the family afloat. Those of you who are suckered in to buying the Duggar books and DVDs will continue to financially support the family. If the breadwinner for the average large family falls ill, the family won't have that financial backup.

      How the Duggars hurt the rest of us: If you have a large family and the breadwinner falls ill, and if you are not sufficiently educated to be able to get a great-paying job to support the family, who pays? We do. Although I have no problem helping a "regular" family who falls on hard times, I do have a whole LOT of trouble watching my tax dollars go to support a family whose parents refused to take responsibility for their reproduction. So many large families are the result of women not having an education and not wanting to go out to work. When you have eight kids, you can talk about how much work that is (hey, you signed up for that, so quit whining) and justify not making a financial contribution. You know, if you want to have a litter, you should make sure in advance that you can pay for them until they all leave the nest. Having a large litter without planning for medical insurance, college funds, backup funding in case of the breadwinner's illness/layoff/death, etc., is IRRESPONSIBLE. You are putting a huge burden on society when you can no longer provide and look to bankruptcy (read: stealing from others who trusted you to pay your bills) and social assistance programs to provide. God should provide, so you should not be able to claim bankruptcy or get food stamps, free medical care, etc. If you believe that God controls your uterus and God will provide, you should not ask the government (the populace) to provide during hard times. Get down on your knees and pray that God will shower you with money. When you ask for help from PEOPLE, you are being a religious hypocrite. That is not GOD PROVIDING for you.

      And then there is the environmental aspect. Anyone who thinks that there is no impact on the environment from overpopulation won't understand/accept what others have to say on the topic, so why bother? Those who are more aware and educated DO understand and will fight this Duggar movement until common sense prevails by lobbying for fewer tax favours and less access to bankruptcy and social/medical assistance for more than the first two or three children in the family. Most of us do not want to get up and go to work every day to support someone else's large litter through our tax dollars and through higher prices brought about when bankruptcy increases the overall debt load, and most of us resent having to pay through taxes for the medical care of a family of eight, ten, or more.

      The Duggars hurt everyone because the Duggar fairytale book leads young couples to think that they can follow in the Duggar footsteps without any negative consequences.

      Please think about the future before you decide to let God open and close your uterus or before you support any politician who would take away your right to contraception. You do not want to have to do what herders do to camels in order to prevent conception when it would be inconvenient: Insert a pebble into the uterus. You want safe, affordable, available contraception so that you can have a family that you can manage and attend to rather than just lie on your back like a pedigreed dog pumping out more pups. There is more to life, and your kids deserve a better example.

      The Duggars are very ill people. Why would anyone listen to them?

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Reader: I could not have agreed with you more. Amen a multillion times.

    • Kim 4 years ago

      I think the people who are mentally ill are those who make a living by writing destructive articles about other families. Enjoy elevating yourself while tearing down others. That goes for many of the posters on this thread too. If you can say one thing about Michelle Duggar (and since I don't know her personally, I'll admit to speculating) I don't think she'll stoop to your level and comment on any negative articles.

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      Amen Kim....

    • peechdoctor 4 years ago

      how is the article "destructive"? if the duggars can be destroyed by something as simple as an article, they seriously need to rethink their way of life. . . .

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      I think the Duggars can care less about what anyone thinks of them. They do what they do, because that is what they believe in. I do not watch the show, but find myself WANTING to defend them. I think the vicious name-calling of them and the accusations of them are ridicules.

      But, that is just me, and my opinion.

      I like gmwilliams and his hubs, or I would not be a follower of his.

    • reader 4 years ago

      "I think the people who are mentally ill are those who make a living by writing destructive articles about other families. Enjoy elevating yourself while tearing down others. That goes for many of the posters on this thread too. If you can say one thing about Michelle Duggar (and since I don't know her personally, I'll admit to speculating) I don't think she'll stoop to your level and comment on any negative article."

      a) She's not smart enough.

      b) She wants to preserve that pure image that suckers so many of you.

      c) She could not possibly intelligently refute my points.

      How easy to say that those of us who oppose the Duggar lifestyle are vicious rather than just fed up with having to help support these families through taxes (and if the Duggars are not paying taxes on their home because it's a 'church', that means that others who live with them pay more in taxes to make up the difference.) How easy it is to make comments without making reasoned arguments to support your point of view. There is nothing vicious about presenting one's point of view if one can back it up.

      If you want to respond to the points I made, go right ahead. If you can think of any reason (other than the religious ones) why having 10 kids is better than having 2, bring it on. And if you DO have a large family or plan on one, I would love to know how YOU (not social services) plan to look after them if the breadwinner fails to provide. And I would also like to know how you plan to look after them if Daddy walks out (and boy this sure has happened with large families). I would also like to know how you deal with the guilt of knowing that one person works himself to death to provide for the family and probably carries a significant stress load worrying about what could happen. And if you can present a reasoned argument for a young girl having to become a parent to her siblings because her mother won't parent them, bring that on as well. Children were not considered to be children prior to the Industrial Revolution. They were put to work as soon as they were old enough to shove up a chimney. The Industrial Revolution changed that FOR MOST OF US IN THE FREE WORLD, and children actually began to have a childhood. They deserve that. In large families in which the older sibs take responsibility for the younger, they don't have that luxury. They are too busy working as parents. That is not cute. That does not develop good character. That causes resentment, and it deprives the older children of having a proper childhood. It also makes the greater world perceive these children as freaks. Now if you can prevent a reasonable argument that this is not true, go for it.

      Don't just write that you "want to defend them". Defend their way of life point by point and tell us how having a huge family helps the children and society.

      "I think the Duggars can care less about what anyone thinks of them. They do what they do, because that is what they believe in,"

      So you support anarchy? You do not believe that societies have mores/rules/standards that enable us to live together in groups? We should all just do whatever suits us and to heck with everyone else? Good luck with that.

      I invite retorts.

    • CMerritt profile image

      Chris Merritt 4 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

      "So you support anarchy? You do not believe that societies have mores/rules/standards that enable us to live together in groups? We should all just do whatever suits us and to heck with everyone else? Good luck with that."

      I will tell you this much, in MY family it is a dictatorship!

      I call the shots and make up the rules. If MY kid breaks one of MY rules, I am also the judge, jury and executioner! It IS MY WAY! PERIOD.

      As American citizens, they are taught to respect our laws. They know we have a Constitution that protects them from a tyrant government...not a tyrant father.

      As a Christian, they are taught to LOVE their neighbors, and to seek the fruit of the spirit (look it up)

      I do not think it takes a villiage to raise a child.....it takes responsible adults who LOVE their children to raise them.

      hows that for a retort?

    • reader 4 years ago

      I cannot believe that leading as a dictator teaches children to make responsible decisions. I do believe in strong parenting, but that is not achieved in Duggar-like families in which parenting is turned over to teenagers. I am not sure how your comment about being judge, jury, and executioner accords with your later comment about the Constitution protecting children from parental tyranny.

      As for looking up the Christian reference, I do not need to do that. I used to fancy myself a Christian and I went to church until I decided that I could no longer participate in the hypocrisy. Too many so-called Christians think of religion as a garment that can be discarded when it does not suit them to wear it.

      Since I do believe in backing up what I say, here are examples of Christian hypocrisy:

      If you are a Christian, you love your neighbor. That includes Muslims, African Americans, Sikhs, same-sex couples in your community, and all other neighbors who are not harming others. How many so-called Christians practice that sort of all-encompassing love?

      If you are a Christian, you cannot divorce, because no man can put asunder what God has joined. The divorce rate in this country seems to suggest that thousands of so-called Christians have become hypocrites on the divorce basis alone.

      If you are a Christian, you must turn the other cheek when someone harms you. That just does not happen. Would most people turn the other cheek if someone were to rob them or lie about them to gain an advantage?

      If you are a Christian, you follow Christ's teaching to pray in private. Today's so-called Christians want children praying publicly in schools. That goes 100% against what Christ taught.

      If you are a Christian, you TRY to follow the teachings of Christ. You do not pick and choose those teachings that are convenient for you. When you do pick and choose, you are guilty of hypocrisy. When you pick and choose, you are not simply being a Christian who is still trying to live up to the ideal; rather, you are being a hypocrite who has become a self-righteous Bible-thumper who has no real understanding of Christianity. One does not USE the teachings of Christ to elevate oneself above non-Christians. One follows the teachings in the belief that doing so will make one a better person. That notion is a joke today.

      I think it takes both a community and loving parents to raise good citizens with strong ethics and decent values, but that is not germane to this thread's basic discussion. We were discussing the impact of large families on the children and on society. I still have not seen any reasoned refutation of the points that I made.

    • Marge 4 years ago

      CMerrit

      "...it takes responsible adults who LOVE their children to raise them"

      I couldn't agree more. Ever notice how Michelle dumps her younger children on her older ones to care for? The "buddy system" is nothing more than the shirking of parental responsibilities.

      Do you ever see JimBob carrying his children, changing a diaper, rocking a child, or giving a child a bath? Come to think of it I haven't seen Michelle do it either. Its always the older daughters. Apparently child care is "women's work".

      Michelle makes me think of the Queen Bee who produces the young that care for the hive and the young she perpetually produces.

      CMerrit, you should google "Josie Duggar seizure" to see something that is outrageous and appalling. When I saw this video it convinced me this woman is nothing but a self absorbed pregnancy junkie. I began having some serious reservations when Michelle and Jim Bob stood over the NICU crib of their critically ill newborn daughter and Michelle could only focus on the possiblity she was pregnant again. Lady, are you out of your fricking mind? JB, can't you keep it in your pants? Your wife almost died! You have a critically ill newborn. What IS with you people? Shouldn't your main focus be on your critically ill child and your other children?

      Oh and Michelle is willing to risk another premature child. How big of her. Any thought to the suffering that child could be subjected to Michelle? How about your other children? How about your own risk?

      JimBob, don't you have an obligation to your wife and children to protect them and their mother? Your wife is at serious risk with another pregnancy and you can only smile like an idiot when announcing her 20th pregnancy.

      CMerrit, take off the rose colored glasses where these people are concerned.

    • Bridget Hainline 4 years ago

      I was reading the TWOP 19 Children and Counting snark and one contributor said that Jennifer Duggar is a neglected kid. I agree with that. Jennifer's feet were dirty and her hair looked greasy. This person said that Jennifer's pale skin and slightly chubby face reminded her of Carrie Dollanganger from "Flowers in the Attic.". Carrie and her twin brother Cory suffered the most from physical neglect and it was more extreme for them than for their older brother Chris and older sister Cathy. This neglect made Carrie quite small for her age and contributed to Cory's death. I do see some FITA references in the Duggar's show with the religious zealotry and the neglect of the needs of the children.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Marge and Bridget: I totally concur with you a multillion percent. Children in large families tend to be neglected more by their parents than children from small families. In large families, as I have reiterated a millinillion times, parents DO NOT raise their children. It is always THE OLDEST CHILD who raises the children. The Duggars are just microcosms of parents of large families. Michelle is not the only megamom who delegates this duty, the overwhelming majority of parents of large families FORCE their oldest children to raise their younger siblings.

      In large families, parental interaction is woefully absent. In large families as opposed to small families, there is more sibling interaction. Studies show that it why children from large families have more elementary vocabularies and other mannerisms than children from small families who have more adult interaction with their parents. You are so on target regarding the Duggars. Children in large families ALWAYS and WITH CERTAINTY raise themselves. I have seen with it associates and relatives who come from large families. There is little parental involvement and interaction in large families and the children are LEFT TO THEIR OWN DEVICES, positive and/or negative.

      With you, I feel that large families are extremely dysfunctional. They do harm to the parents and especially the children! Always feel free to add to the discussion! Adieu Marge and Bridget.

    • Dr Kenndey 4 years ago

      I'm afraid I cannot whole agree with the over all opinions posted here.

      First of all, its very important to understand the cultural bias required to assess a mental illness. A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological pattern, potentially reflected in behavior, that is generally associated with distress or disability, and which is not considered part of normal development of a person's culture. In other words, what might be considered a mental illness in one culture is not at all in another. America has a goal of being culturally diverse.

      Living America has meant that much of what we consider culturally normal is up to the freedom of the individual. For this reason we are a more diverse culture and proudly so. This means a good degree of tollerence for others who are not like us.

      In most societies there is a lot of intollerence and pressure to conform to over arching norms. Therefore there is lot of prejudice and condemnation to keep people in line with what is felt to be "normal and healthy." I hear a bit of that in the article and these comments. When we look at a large family and because we ourselves feel there is something wrong with a large family, even if none of the kids do, we are applying our prejudice or our percedptions onto another how seem perfectly happy with the circumstance. This is done to homosexuals, the poor, and historically has been done by race and gender. In the past, a divorced parent or single parent was automatically seen as harmful to a child.

      The Amish live in a similar way to the Duggers, expect they are taught to work very early in hand labor and do not live with moder technology. Is this abuse? 200 years ago, it wasn't. Is it not our freedom to look back in time if we wish and decide the simplicity of the time provided great value and family connections that have been lost and chose that without being condemed by others who value living in a different way as a personal preference?

      Back to the Amish, they raise large families and at 18 give their children the freedom to chose whethery they wan to stay or go into the world. 90% chose to stay.

      We may not understand the lifestyle because it is different than us, but the older children really need to be asked instead of us assuming and jumping to conslusions. Wait until they are older. The word "brainwashed" was used in regard to the children. However, in the above article a similar propsition was declared about the writer and "us." The writer said, "We have been educated to know that when a person becomes a parent, it is their responsibility to raise their children, not other children." I would say that if we ALL have been educated to believe something and we ALL believe it, then we are ALL taught or brainwashed into belief systems. Yes, we all are taught different ways of life and follow them. Yet when someone is taught something different than we believe, it shows a shallowness of understanding to suppose THEY are wrong and WE are right. Tollernce is the key to learning to lvie in diversity. We really must BE the change we want to SEE in the world..as Neslon Mandella said.

      Our perceptions as beings is second hand in nature and much of what we perceive relies on the Scientific Method for assessing simply because we as being perceive through sense and intercepting thoughts which mean much of what we perceive is tainted by our own prejudices.

      Since I don't see the Department of Social Services going in and taking the kids, I must assume these distant appraisels of the Duggers are just biased. If they were not and the children were being harmed, they would not be in the care of the parents.

      Please understand, our ways are not always right for others and that is why we live in the land of the free and the home of the brave. To entollerantly project our way of living or what we have All been taught on others living in the freedom of choice is short sighted.

    • Marge 4 years ago

      Hi gmwilliams

      I don't believe large or small families can be painted with a broad brush. My issue is with a mother who in my opinion is a self absorbed pregnancy junkie who dumps her children on their older siblings to care for and a father I see as a controller.

      Its not that parents are better simply because a family is smaller or worse because it is larger.

    • Marge 4 years ago

      Dr. Kennedy,

      While you raise some valid points I cannot agree that because the DSS has not gone in then everything is fine.

      We have heard of more than one tragic tale of children enduring abuse and/or killed because the DSS didn't do its job.

      Also, Amish children attend school and socialize with children outside their families. They are also given the choice to leave. I have never felt that large families in and of themselves are pathological.

      We can look into the past at what was acceptable and be appalled. Children forced to work in factories, sold into slavery, raised in and working in houses of prostitution. Children knew no different and accepted their place. Did that make it right? We see plenty today that is unacceptable and appalling.

      I have stated in previous posts what I find disconcerting about this whole situation and will not repeat myself. I will say that I am convinced Michelle is more focused on pregnancy than anything, to her and her children's detriment. Put simply, a pregnancy junkie. I also believe the older daughters are forced to sacrifice any semblence of a life to provide child care and household services. Every aspect of these children's lives is rigidly controlled. Do any attend advanced education outside the home? Do they socialize with neighborhood children? Do the daughters have friends they go out with for an evening or confide in? The whole focus of their lives are each other.

      The older daughters, who are young women, cannot even talk to young men while on vacation without their father acting like Zeus hurtling thunder bolts. Hey Jim Bob, they're not school children, they're grown women for heaven's sake! They have shown an appalling disregard for Josie and her health and safety.

      JB even had some of his small children don protective gear and clean out property abandoned by hoarders. One can only imagine the risks the children were exposed to.

      Do you ever see JB and Michelle hold and cuddle their children? Change diapers, give baths, rock a child? Sorry Dr. Kennedy, but I see red flags here.

    • mochamommadec 4 years ago

      The Amish children are part of a community, not part of a movement. The Amish are not a population threat. They are not holding themselves up as a model or pushing themselves forward as the Duggars are. A young mother who is not Amish is not likely to see the Amish on TV and think, "Wow. I should do that." The same cannot be said of the young mothers who watch the Duggars and are suckered into thinking that having a horde of kids is paying tribute to God.

      As for freedom of choice, how about the freedom of future generations to eat, breathe clean air, and not live stacked on top of each other? Freedom to do just whatever you please without regard for your impact on others is very selfish and shortsighted. It can also be illegal at times.

    • Susan 4 years ago

      I have noticed a trend with large "superstar" Christian families. The sons do tend to break out and marry and move on, but the girls sit on the shelf many times. Your term "baby hunger" is fascinating. I have noticed this with someone I know who keeps fostering to adopt. She loves them when they are babies, but it does get so complicated when they can talk, walk, and have their own will. The house is a train wreck, but the social services keeps giving them more babies. Now I know it's part of a syndrome. I do value life, however, and am sure the Duggar children are happy to have been given the great gift of Life.

    • ginai 4 years ago

      .......O.M.G!

      Here is a family, making it on their own, not bothering nobody, no FOOD STAMPS, no handouts.... Ok they have lots of children, SO FREAKING WHAT!?

      This is U.S.A we are not communist yet! if they can feed them, so let them be!

      The thing you folks SHOULD BE FUSSING ABOUT is, the gal in the supermarket who has 6 kids, all different fathers, buying her 2 carts full of groceries using YOUR TAX DOLLARS - FOOOOD STAMPS! .. go GRIPE about that!

      The Duggars have it made! those kids don't have to 'settle' they will never have to feel 'alone/lonely' they will never be 'friendless' they will never feel 'out of place' they will always have companionship'. how lovely! I wish I had more than the couple I had, Im too old now to carry on, but there is NOTHING wrong with keeping your family close.. the more the merry!

    • Sherry 4 years ago

      This is not a communist country do it's none of your business or anyone else how many kids someone has. If we keep allowing people to push their communist like thinking on everyone then we are no better off than those people in china.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 4 years ago

      @ginai and Sherry, No we are not a communist country. I have to laugh I have not heard anyone talk about communism or the threat of it since Reagan days. Anyway...this has nothing to do with communism but I do think we as a caring people should be concerned about anyone who breeds uncontrollably and there is absolutely NO way these children are getting the attention they need to become emotionally healthy adults.

      This bringing children into the world "just because you can" is a sign of obsessive and compulsive disorder. I also do not like the hypocritical actions of the parents. They are restrictive and controlling over these kids. "NO TV" "TV is BAD" but A-okay to be ON TV and make money and advertise things "WE will never let you buy". These Duggar parents are phonies. Time to get your tubes tied!!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, I could not have agreed with you more. Please feel free to add to the discussion!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      Add to this that they follow the Fundamentalist teachings of Bill Gothard and Vision Forum. Vision Forum is ran by Doug Phillips and Bill Gothard founded Advanced Training Institute. Their goal is to turn the clock back. Bill Gothard is a firm believer in forced family relationships and young aults living at home until arriage..

      "the gal in the supermarket who has 6 kids, all different fathers, buying her 2 carts full of groceries using YOUR TAX DOLLARS - FOOOOD STAMPS! .. go GRIPE about that!"

      Just because a couple is married and not on welfare is no reason for them to have so many kids. The Duggars relied on help from their church long before TLC so it was obvious they couldn't afford those kids.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Thank you, Amanda! I totally concur the Duggars have way TOO many children and obviously, they cannot afford them especially physically and psychologically. The oldest children are raising those children thus forfeiting their childhood and adolescence. Besides being dysfunctional parents, the Duggars are also abusive parents. Again, Amanda, thank you for stopping by and adding to the conversation!

    • Darren 4 years ago

      Not only can they not afford the kids without TLC or their sponsors they fey out of paying taxes by claiming their house as a church. They also get subsidies from the government Wichita comes from. You guessed it TAX DOLLARS. Therefore the argument of they are making it on their own is incorrect. And if they ever enter the real world they will be severely out of place due yo the overtly sheltered life they have been forced into. They will have no clue how to interact with people that are not white or of the same faith as them. It isnothealthy for your only friends to be family members. Jim-Bob and Michele only raised 2or3 of the kids at best after that they could no longer be bothered to do so and forced the older ones to do it. They think overpopulation is a lie and every one in the world standing shoulder to shoulder could fit into Jacksonville the worlds population couldn't fit in Florida. And if the duggar kids carry on like their parents or other families take a page from their book and breed out of control the government will have no choice but to limit the number of kids a family can have.

    • Darren 4 years ago

      That was supposed to say get not fey using a kindle fire didn't notice the error till after I posted.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Duggar, I totally agree with you. Not only the Duggars but the average child from a large family do not have that many friends. They mostly have friends who are family members. That is why children from large families are more insular and parochial than children from small families who are more universalistic and cosmopolitan from exposure to all types of children. Not only are the Duggars totally dysfunctional, the typical large family is as well.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 4 years ago

      gmwilliams, so true. I was married to someone who came from a large family-10 kids-your siblings are your friends. And when you reach adulthood, you have a hard time forming close relationships with people outside of your family unit. There is a real lacking of closeness with someone, even a spouse because it was never developed with anyone other than your immediate family.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, this is so true. People from large families often put their siblings before even their husbands and children. They also have no outside friends like people from small families do. As I have said before, people who come from large families are more insular and parochial than people who come from small families who are more openminded and universalistic because they have friends and associates outside of the family. People from large families can be described in one word.......strange. They also have no closenss with their spouse and/or their own children because their siblings come first! That is why I would never enter into a relationship with a person from a large family. Noooo way!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      Yea look what happened to Michael Jackson. They weren't allowed outside friendships,. I am not saying no large families are close but how can all of them have a relationship so far apart in age like the Duggars? Take the older Duggar siblings 18 and older and younger siblings five and under. When the younger ones grow up the older ones will be nearing 40 or better. How will they know one another's spouses with so many?

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      To Amanda: The average large family is psychologically/emotionally incestuous. It is a completely parasitic existence. All of the people I know from large families only had siblings for companions and friends. My aunts and uncles have no outside friends and only associate with themselves. As I said before, people from large families are well.......strange!

    • cherylvanhoorn profile image

      cherylvanhoorn 4 years ago from Sydney

      Okay I have to ask this: can you give me impirical data for what you are stating here? Give me citations of articles, psychology reports, psychiatric studies and data to back up your claims.

      Again you are not taking into account a socialisation process. It may be true that a burden toward household care and child care will fall upon the members of older children within these families to assist in the raising of the younger children this is another form of socialisation. What I mean by this is that we socialize our children to the environment we live in. How many of you out there who have children encourage and reward children to do adult chores in the house in order to prepair them for the world that lays ahead of them? We teach them to assist in the daily running of a house hold in order to aid ourselves but also to aid these children in learning valuable life skills.

      Many children who are born into these families are bought into a belief system that this is a natural system of life and indeed it was veiwed as completely normal as little as fifty years ago. Blaming the Duggan's practices as being a cult followed belief system does not cut it as well unless we are to classify the Catholic church as a cult; with in this church system cannon law decrees that it is illegal to partake in birth control and in the wise words of Monty Python 'every sperm is sacred (could you catch that one dear?'

      Some of these views are naïve to the extreme and show very little understanding of human nature and the not too distant history of our species. Many other animal species have the ability to reproduce large amounts of off spring and the older siblings of the system are charged with the care of their younger siblings.

      Again I say give me empirical evidence to back up what you are saying. Give me references that I can go and read and check on. 100 years ago large families were the norm and the care of the younger siblings feel to those of the elder. My mother herself was the eldest of six children and often cared for her younger siblings.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Cheryl: Studies show that large families are entirely detrimental to children in more ways than one. They have little to no parental attention. They raise themselves and are left to their own devices. They are also more likely to be either poor or impoverished socioeconomically. In other words, they live worse than those in small families. Large families were appropriate to more agragian and preurbanized times where children were needed to help work on farms. However, in postmodern and postindustrialized times, large families are totally unnecessary, especially with the advent of birth control. No intelligent thinking and/or educated person has a large family today. People had large families when they do not know any better. People have advanced and evolved and small families are a part of such an evolution in point! This is the 21st century, not the 19th !

    • Darren 4 years ago

      Cheryl if they were being prepared for the world before them they would also be introduced to a wide verity of people. Also you used the word Aid the Dugger children do it all. Jim-bob and Michell have no part in the raising of the children after they are weened.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Darren, pay no attention to Cheryl. She is living in her own world. Darren, as an intelligent and thinking person, you know that the oldest children raise the youngest ones and that all Michelle does is act as an incubator. This is not only the Duggars but the typical large famiy. As any thinking and intelligent person knows that children from large families receive less parental attention and care than children from small families. I have seen this all my life from my friends, associates, and relatives. Large families were apropro in more agrarian times but in postindustrial societies, they are a complete liability. In other words, people had large families when they did not know any better and now that people are more educated, they are opting for small families for the benefit of their children. Nice to hear from you again, Darren. Feel free to stop by anytime!

    • cherylvanhoorn profile image

      cherylvanhoorn 4 years ago from Sydney

      gmwilliams this is extremerely arrogant of you. Pay no attention to Cheryl. You put your work out there for comment and when some one differs to your line of thinking you dismiss them. Again I say as you have a background in sociology give me EMPERICAL data to back up what you are saying. Give me so papers I can read, some published scholarly material that will give me an insight into what you are saying as I am honestly trying to understand your point of view.

      I have a friend who is a single mother of seven children, one of which has downs syndrome and her children have all turned out well and she has worked very hard toward giving her children a great and stable background and platform to launch of from for life. Other parent's who have only one or two children have their children often grow up to be as crazy as a shit house rat. You cannot post these kind of assertions without the back up of data to prove it. As some one with a background in sociology you should know this.

      You should also know that coming from a background of sociology you cannot place a blanket approach on individual behavior and also need to take into account the geopolitical, psychosocial and homeostatic relationship with society that acts as a mirror within the worlds we inhabit to present our paths to us.

      I feel that you are being naïve and quiet frankly, insulting to the extreme here.

      Again I say back up what you are saying with data. You can e-mail it to me at cheezel1984@live.com.au

      I am quite interested in seeing it.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I base my observations on my reading of sociological literature in college and reading such books on my own. I also have friends, associates, cousins, and my parents who were from megafamilies. My parents told me tales of coming from a large family.

      My father told me of the perils of coming from a large family. He portended that because of his large family, he did not have the opportunity to continue his education. My mother also was extremely miserable growing up as the oldest of ten. As soon as she could, she left home. My aunt, the third of ten, raised her younger siblings and as soon as she could, she left home. My aunt relayed with bitterness how she was often the family mascot. My mother and aunt hated being the older children in a large family. They further portended that my grandmother was often short regarding having a large amount of children.

      My mother and aunt relayed that all their clothes came from donations from a maternal aunt. My mother asserted that they had to struggle. Out of the ten children, only my uncle had 7 children who also grew up impoverished. Out of those 7 children, only one was educated and middle-class. The rest were just as impoverished as the parents.

      In my elementary and high school, it was we children from small families who were the most affluent and had parental attention. The children from large families were impoverished, had little or no parental attention, and led extremely hardscrabble lives. There is a difference in the cultre of the small and large families. In large families, there is little or no individual attention from the parents. Monies are tight to nonexistent. Children have to make do with the worst food and clothing. Forget about medical/dental care, most children of large families would not receive adequate medical care if there were no school physicians.

      Everything in the large families is allocated for only the rudiments in life, nothing more. Children in large families are inculcated with the survival mentality. They have no privacy to think of as they live in crowds. They are taught that the individual means nothing and that the group means everything. In other words, children from large families have little or no sense of self in contrast to children reared in small families who have a high sense of self.

      Oldest children in large families have no childhood nor adolescence to speak of. They are compelled by their parents to raise their younger siblings. Their needs are nothing. Oldest children in large families live a life of utter and desolate hell. They often have to leave school to support their families. In large families, the older children are lucky if they finish secondary education as their parents need them to contribute to the family income.

      Oldest children in large families have no time for hobbies and/or other interests outside of that of caring for their younger siblings. They must be available for their parents and younger siblings 24/7/365. They are overused and unappreciated. Their situation is quite analagous to that of a slave laborer and an indentured servant.

      The only person in a large family that has it good is the youngest child. He/she has the least responsibility and often gets away with murder. He/she is also spoiled rotten.

      Children from small families, au contraire, have individualized parental attention. They also have monies to pursue more cultural and intellectual activities. They are also more exposed to cultural and intellectual activities than children from large families. Because of parental attention, they have more advanced vocabularies and more mature mannerisms than children from large families.

      Children from small families are more affluent and thus have more nutritious food and receive better medical/dental care. They are also more likely to pursue tertiary education as there is monies allotted to this. Children from small families are better off socioeconomically and psychologically than children from large families.

      To reiterate, people had large families in more agrarian times and when there was little or no access to birth control. Margaret Sanger, a nurse who also came from a large family, realized the importance of birth control and a woman's right to control her reproductive destiny. With the advancement of birth control technologies, women, especially educated women, had smaller families. These women know that in smaller families, children receive more love and attention and have a small amount of children is more healthful on the woman's body.

      The large family is a thing of the past. Educated and intelligent people do not have large families because they know the detriments of having such a family. Smaller families live better and are better overall. This is only commonsense! No intelligent and educated person elects to have a large family.

    • cherylvanhoorn profile image

      cherylvanhoorn 4 years ago from Sydney

      gmwilliams if I may speak bluntly I am unconvinced by your thesis statement. Your core evidence is run off observation of family members and those of friends and do not lead creedence to a sociological debate on this topic. Bluntly your are not offering any kind of information that is significant in supporting your claim. I find this difficult on many levels.

      The major being that you have stated in your profile that you have studied sociology and no sociologist will go into a debate of this kind with very little data to back up their assertions.

      Another issue is the fact that it is taken predominately from framily and friends. I was one of two children and my mother was the eldest of six children while my father the child of seven. I have another two friends who have both born seven children each and none of those children lack for care or love on the part of the child and before you say anything yes both of them are single mothers who are doing a magnificent job in a world that is difficult with a two parent system. There is no sign in these children either by acting out, giving lip to the family or being willful and challenging. They are finding their paths nicely thank you very much.

      Once again I find the ideas that you have presented as myopic with little view to clinical studies into the areas in question and the ideatition that large families are a threat to the sanctity of marriage quite frankly laughable as the situation was reversed many years ago. Calling it draconian and out dated is a decision and a value judgement that is yours and not that of the rest of the world. Human nature being what it is there are going to be a degree of people who believe like you and I personally have an issue with large amounts of children in a family however that is MY view point and not someone elses.

      You need to be very, very careful with what you are saying with this as you are buying into the philosophy of women's reproductive rights. Just as she is free to choose whether or not she will bear a child is very much as valid when it is reversed and put into practice that allows women to procreate as much as she wishes and when it comes down to it quiet frankly it is non of their business.

      The next objection that I hear to this one is the fact that there is a reality TV show on the front and that it is being rammed down our throats. There is a simple answer to that-don't watch it. Like the Kardashins and Jersey Shores, I deplore them as something that is a moral and integral bankruptcy of television and screen and very, very annoying so I change the channel. Why bother wasting your energy on something that you can't change and that is there. Turn the channel off, find something to do and forget about large families if it does not concern you.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I do not watch the Duggars , I read about them in internet articles. At least we agree to disagree. This is good and part of a great discourse.

    • cherylvanhoorn profile image

      cherylvanhoorn 4 years ago from Sydney

      That is true but don't read about it if it upsets you so much. Seriously if you do have any data on it I would be really interested to see it as I am fascinated by it.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I do not have any data offhand; however, to reiterate, I have read some books on the subject in college and on my own. I also have observed and associated with people from large families whether it was friends, relatives, and associates. I also use inductive and deductive logic when assessing situations. The purpose of education is to use one own's discernment, reasoning and assessment regarding situations. Empirical data is well and good but one must also think and use one's assessment.

    • cherylvanhoorn profile image

      cherylvanhoorn 4 years ago from Sydney

      To a degree this is true and I am not trying to negate your belief's or what you see, think or feel on this topic. You are just making some extreme claims in regards to this family that border on the liablious and I would hate to see you get in trouble for expressing what you are thinking. In future with this kind of thing make sure you have the data to back yourself up in case. I would hate to see it come back to bite you.

      Personally I think they are nuts but it is their life and there is a great deal of abuse out there that is still rampant and that needs to be addressed.

      Just be careful how you word things. :-)

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Thank you, cheryl, and God bless you and yours!

    • cherylvanhoorn profile image

      cherylvanhoorn 4 years ago from Sydney

      You are welcome. There is a psychopathology that does come into play here. It is tied in with religeious and pyschosocial disorientation and in some ways boarders on OCD (obssessive compulsive disorder). From what I have seen of this phenomena it is akin to hoarding.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      That is so true.

    • cherylvanhoorn profile image

      cherylvanhoorn 4 years ago from Sydney

      From a lay point of view (in another life I was a registered nurse and have done two years of psychology and I am currently undertaking a Bachelor in Communication with a double major in Creative Writing and Film Studies) I like to watch life. I like to watch people and I am fascinated by peoples behaviours and how they interactive. I have come to believe that for me the pursuit of this is through the absurd aspects of life in context of the way they live their lives and in commenting on them through writing and film.

      There is a shift in people over the last several decades where they are producing extreme behaviour. This is mirrored in a multitude of absurd behaviors that people perpetuate today. There is hoarding which has no rhym or rhythm to it. I live with a hoarder and god it is hard! There is no logic with it and like the case of large families it goes against the logic of the day.

      In today's world the 2.5 child is the standard. We are living in a society that is ruled by extremes and I don't quiet know why. It is something that I am trying hard to understand but is elluding me a great deal of the time.

      Living with a hoarder is one of the reasons I am trying to understand. One of the best examples of how absurd and how emotive this disorder can get is exampled with my mother in law. One of my kids recently finished school. In Australia kids wear school uniforms to school. When my eldest finished my mother in law was passionate about passing his uniforms on which is all very well and good but to who? There is no second hand uniform shop where he goes to school and though I bagged up his uniform to go to a charity she was almost in tears over it. Then when the same issue arose with my second son I was informed by the school that there was no second hand shop there either. She did not believe me and rang the school and they told her they did have one. Man confused much! The point here is two fold-1 the obsession that went into this behavior, I mean really is the world going to fall apart if they don't go to the school and 2 the obsession to the point that she went behind my back to double check this.

      This to me is kind of a metaphor to the way we are living our lives in this day and age. We compartmentalize to the point that behaviors squeeze out the side like having a multitude of children against the logic of the day or hoarding or gambling or drinking. While we know that the behavior is not right we are continuing to perpetuate these behaviors and the social context in which we are constantly lookinf forward for instant social interaction and gratification is feeding these behaviors.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      " I have another two friends who have both born seven children each and none of those children lack for care or love on the part of the child and before you say anything yes both of them are single mothers who are doing a magnificent job in a world that is difficult with a two parent system. "

      But these days they can get tax breaks and scholarships unlike their early 20th century counterparts. While they may not lack love or care, I still think there is no way to spend quality time with each child.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Amanda, agreed!

    • tussin profile image

      I'M BANNED Y'ALL!!!!!!!!!! 4 years ago from Behind You

      You have to consider that what the Duggar's do is unconventional in the US, but in South America, up until one or two generations ago, most rural families had 15 or so kids. You can find many middle aged and elderly adults in Latin America who have 14 or so siblings. Those that I've met seem pretty well adjusted and did not feel neglected by their parents.

      An advantage of having so many brothers and sisters is that when someone is having trouble, all the siblings help get that person back on their feet. In a small nuclear family, there are fewer people to share the burden of helping someone with problems, and often those people become burdens of the state.

      I'm not saying I think this is a good model for a modern first world country. And I definitely think people turn out better when their parents can devote more resources to their upbrining. But I think the media and commentators have focused solely on the hypothetical negatives of the situation. Truthfully, none of us actually knows how the Duggar house is really run when the TV cameras are off. As you know, those reality shows are heavily edited to show people at their worst.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      I am getting a bit disgusted about comments putting down spoiled kids from smaller families. Why is no welfare such a big deal about big families? We know there is no way possible to raise that many kid with no help these days. I left a comment in one article about those raised in bigger families bragging on no gov assistance asking how much attention they got from their parents. I also said yea big happy family until it comes to money. Look what is happening with Michael Jackson.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Amanda my darling, you are a person after my own heart. Do you notice that there is A DOUBLE STANDARD here. People from large families can criticize small families, especially only children, as being"spoiled". However.........yes, however, when one tells the facts that many large families are impoverished, socioeconomically and psychosocially deprived, there goes the attack!

      In other words, THEY can do to small families but you from a small family DON'T YOU DARE do the same to large families. I am telling the truth about large family life and I am being castigated. You know what, Amanda, I really don't give a ......... They talked about small families and it is time that the shoe is on the other foot so to speak.

      Many people from large families refuse to acknowledge their dire socioeconomic circumstances. Yes, children from large families receive less parental attention and often have to raise themselves. They also perform lower academically than children from small families because in large families, monies are tight and there is few monies for the necessities, let alone intellectual and educational paraphernalia.

      Parents of large families are not concerned about their children's socioeconomic, psychological, and educational outcome as parents of small families are. That is a fact which the former refuse to acknowledge. In large families, children have little or no parental interaction, they either raise themselves or each other. In most cases, it is the oldest child who is the parentified child in the family. Most parents of large families compel their oldest children to raise their younger siblings, which is totally unfair. Yes, parents of large families are indeed selfish, thinking about their own wants and pleasures and not caring about the outcome of their children.

      Children from large families have the worst nutrition because nutritious and healthy foods are costly. That means that they consume nonnutritious and processed foods. They also depend upon donations for clothing and other items. In other words, children in large families are more likely to be recipients of outside aid than children from small families.

      Children from large families often have to work at young ages to get extras for themselves and to supplement the family income. When I say that, I get a barrage of negative responses from such people. Well the truth hurts, baby! Well, let me continue-children from large families are also LEAST likely to attend college and other forms of tertiary education, they are lucky if they finish secondary education. Need I say more. Amanda, you are so correct regarding your premise about large families and so am I. That is the reason why I write such articles on the large family.

      They are indeed different from you and I! They have a different culture, psychology, and milieu.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      I wouldn't need welfare either if the church supported me andIi got child tax credits. TLC is obviously fooling a lot of people from the 19 K Facebook page.. I doubt even in a place of lower cost of living lie Arkansas you can raise 19 kids on a real estate salary. The larger families who say they aren't on welfare likely lived well below average lifestyle doing without basic amenities. I don't if they say all their large family went to college and became doctors. How was it paid for? It is unlikely the parents paid for their tuition. Either they earned it themselves or went on scholarships. The problem most have with large fmailies is the attitude.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Amen, honey. It is called myopic vision and inverse logic. Keywords for the night-myopic vision and inverse logic. Myopic vision is when a person, although he/she may be dysfunctional, refused to acknowledge this and portend that he/she is quite normal. Inverse logic is believing that wrong is right and right is wrong.

      Now, for the lesson. Many large families DO without the basic amenities. That explains why people from large families develop a poverty consciousness. They are used to living in want and lack, believing that such is a normal lifestyle. That is why many of them assert that people from small families are "spoiled" because they live socioeconomically better than they do. Those who went to college either won scholarships and/or worked their way through. Their parents did not send them. Amen to that point, Amanda.

      You are so ON TARGET, many people of large families have the attitude that their dysfunctional lifestyle is right. That is analagous to a dope addict explaining the need for continuous highs and fixes. The Duggars are not the only large family that is dysfunctional. An overwhelming majority of large families are. I would let to add that these same people find it perfectly alright to criticize small families but if a person DARES to critique their famiiial arrangement, there is quite a torrential wrath from these people. Adieu, Amanda, and have a lovely night. I welcome you to my page and always feel free to stop by! I have never seen a lifestyle as abnormal and dysfunctional as the large family. Large families were fine in more rural and agrarian times when children were needed to work the farms but not in this postmodern era!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 4 years ago

      We need a "thumbs Up" icon on hubpages. I give Amanda and gm two thumbs UP. I agree completely with both of your recent posts.!! Double standard-Amen!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, Thank you for your response. I have written more hubs on the large family. Feel free to stop by and respond. I always welcome your intelligent response. It seems that the people from large families are being quite defensive when the TRUTH is told. OUCH!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, people from large families have been critiquing people from small families for a long time. However, don't ANYONE dare to do the same to them. Oh, what sacrilege indeed. They come down upon you like a murderously vengeful horde!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      However, smaller families aren't ALWAYS economically better. For example, Jim Bob Duggar was raised one of two and they struggled for money.

      It seems people are trying to relive the Waltons. There is large family facebook page called I Love my Large Family who always are trying to justify their lifestyle. One poster had the nerve to ask her mother which grandkids would you want to give up.Maybe they are concerned about the kids. It should be 'I hate my large family' given some of the advice on punishment. I left a wall post saying the had baby rabies but it got deleted obviously. As I say nothing personal against larger families but I think they are ran more like an army.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Amanda, you and I know that there are. Children in large to very large families are not treated with the respect and individualism that children from small families are. They have their world and modus operandi and we have ours. The large family environment is frought with many maladies so let us leave it at THAT!

    • Anonymous 4 years ago

      I'm 47 years old, from the family of six kids, with an affluent background. My parents did the best they could. My oldest sister was born in '53, I was born in '65. Large families suck. Dysfunction, Discomfort. I tried to move away, but was thwarted by my brother who followed me to my city of choice. I moved back to my hometown city then, because of that, and because my brother married my best friend. I'm 47 years old, and I'm finally putting my foot down with my siblings that I DON'T WANT TO SPEND THE HOLIDAYS WITH YOU! I just want to chill out with my husband and son, and perhaps, perhaps, once in awhile we can get together for a holiday. I want to move on!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Anonymous, thank you for telling the truth. There are people from large families who myopically defend their dysfunctional life. They staunchly and delusionally contend that they are fine; however, upon close examination, they are totally FUBAR. Thank you for stating the facts and always feel free to stop by anytime. You have found a home here!

    • Starmom41 4 years ago

      I agree with your viewpoint. This isn't the olden days when birth control didn't exist, it's these "people's" personal choice. While not all larger-sized families are a wreck, these jerks have gone to ridiculous extremes- both in terms of "family" size & the way they operate (from everything I've read about them). Maybe older kids can take on some responsibility, but these "parents" essentially have their kids doing -their- jobs. Maybe they should put their time into -raising- their kids instead of mass-producing them.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Starmom41: YOU called it, girl! Ouch, you are so on target with your premise. They are to be pitied. Michelle is in need of some very deep psychiatric(note I did not say psychological) help. She has baby hunger which is better fulfilled if she had a hobby(besides THAT one) and maybe volunteer to help other children.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      As we said even if the family is not a wreck what about parental attention and individual growth? Some who defend the Duggars and say they aren't starving or aren't on welfare do not think about this. You can have all the resources and money in the world and lack attention. I see the Duggars as no different than affluent families where the parents stay gone on business trips etc.

      I don't really think of 6 kids as a large family but I imagine it wasn't easy.

    • kathleenkat profile image

      kathleenkat 4 years ago from Bellingham, WA

      The same can be said about the Jolie-Pitt clan, how they can adopt that many children and have time for them with all the movies?

      I don't agree with everything the original poster stated. It might be a little extreme.. But they do seem to be pushing their resources to the brink.

      I believe the father Duggar is an engineer, no? They get paid a lot, but I could be wrong.

      Also... Who knows how the children might turn out? Perhaps dorm style living and strict schedules and responsibilities will make them much better communicators in the future. Or maybe they will be lonely.

    • Courtney Morgan 4 years ago

      I would like to start this comment with a disclaimer: I am a Christian, and I do whole-heartedly believe that children are a gift from God and that there is a purpose for every conception. However, I do not believe that large families (large being defined not as a number but as whatever is too much for a specific couple manage) are very responsible. In the case of the Duggars, I do believe that they love their children, even if they arguably do not get an appropriate amount of quality time with them. I also would like to point out that Michelle homeschools, and that the older children are very articulate, so it is not appropriate to say that she does nothing since she has apparently at least been able to educate her brood. My main concern for their family is the amount of work they expect from the children and the lack of privacy as mentioned above. I also believe that Michelle has a responsibility to her children to take care of herself. There is a risk with every pregnancy that the mother may not survive, and after so many pregnancies, she has to be treading a very thin line. She needs to protect herself so she can be there for the children she already has.

      That being said, I think the author and some who have commented are being way too harsh. The insinuation that parents cannot adequately raise more than two children is ridiculous. Anyone who cannot handle more than two kids probably should not have any, because if you ever let your kids have a sleepover, you will be in serious trouble. Three or four is fine, especially if there are two or three years between them. Five or six is probably pushing it for most people, but if mom stays home, grandma lives with you, or you can afford to hire a nanny, it is still possible to give adequate attention to each child. You can maintain relationships with five or six friends, can't you? My mom is the youngest of eleven. For her family, that was way too many. But I have friends who have done very well with four or five and probably (if money were no issue) could have done just as well with fifteen because they are fully committed to being good parents. My point is that, in terms of what is best for the children, family size is dependent on what the parents are made of, not some number made up by anti-overpopulation fanatics. You can argue all day that big families are bad for the environment and public health, but arguing for a concrete maximum based on psychology will not hold water.

      One more thing: by the definition given, Michelle Duggar does not have "baby hunger." Consistently, her youngest is still an infant when she gets pregnant again, so she cannot be missing what she still has.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      The Duggars aren't' just an average large family. They practice Quiverfull. I think we are being no more harsh to them than they are to smaller families. Baby addiction is defined as continually wanting another baby when your current one starts taking their first steps. When Michelle has another and the current is barely a year risking her own life yes it is an addiction. They seemingly use religion as a cover. Note you rarely see her interact with toddlers after a new baby. This has been brought up many times. For example, Jennifer cried for Jill when she left for the airport on a mission trip. Jackson got lost at New York and turned to Jana or Jessa for comfort. Most toddlers turn to parents. No one said all large families are dysfunctional. It is when you add fanatical religion like Quiverfull in the mix who thinks you are more blessed with each child regardless of your ability to provide. Just because every pregnancy is a risk doesn't mean she should have 19 kids. I also notice on Nanny shows there are always 4 or more.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Welcome back, Amanda, nice to have your input regarding this issue! You are right Amanda, parents of large families tend to be highly judgmental to parents of small families, especially parents of only children. Many parents of large families believe that because they have a large brood of children, EVERY parent should do the same and if they do not, they are selfish and hedonistic!

      Amanda, no use of beating a dead horse. You and I know that large families can be quite dysfunctional and pathological to say the least. The large families have pathologies which is nonexistent in small families. However, despite education that small families are better for the parents and the children overall, many people are going to have large families. This is analogous to the obese person electing to eat himself/herself to into an early grave! Something is truly amiss here!

      Well, I do not have to raise them! That is all I am going to say regarding this issue!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      Obviuosly the commentor hasnr read all the comments or took things out of context

    • B Lucy profile image

      B Lucy 4 years ago from Podunk, Virginia

      Wow . . there seem to be a lot of angry comments generated by this hub. I do not know enough about the Duggars or their religion to make specific observations. However, I don't feel any family with that many children, no matter how financially stable, can be healthy. It appears to be more of an isolated machine rather than a family. These children cannot be receiving enough individual attention from their parents - it's simply not enough hours in the day. The older children are taking on adult responsibilities at a very young age. And what is the impact huge families have on the environment? We have jammed enough humans onto this Earth of ours. The Duggars alone have produced more dirty diapers than a dozen families combined. God gave people the ability to reason and make intelligent decisions . . which in my opinion, includes using birth control.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      B Lucy, Now you have got ME started! I could not have agreed with you more. Of course, people with large to very large families are putting their children at an extreme detriment. Such children are disadvantaged in more ways than one.

      In the average large to very large family, not only the Duggars, children are indeed raising themselves. Parental attention is nil to nonexistent in the large family environment because two people are incapable of giving individualized attention to such a large brood of children. In large families, some children, particularly the older ones, are going to be neglected in favor of the younger ones.

      In addition to that, parents of large to very large families seldom raise their children. They usually force the oldest children to raise the younger ones which means that they are forfeiting their childhoods and adolescents. Oldest children in large to very large families lead quite a hellish existence. They are on 24/7/365 for their parents and younger siblings. The childhood of an oldest child in a large to very large family is comparable to days in the winter solstice-very short!

      I believe that large families are dysfunctional and pathological to say the least. In my opinion, I believe that people should have from 1-4 children. Any more than that, children are not receiving the individualized parental attention they need. Yes, couples should use birth control in order to have a high quality family life. B Lucy, oftentimes, people fail to use common sense regarding to planning for their children; however, they realize too late how onerous raising a large family could be!

    • B Lucy profile image

      B Lucy 4 years ago from Podunk, Virginia

      I'm generally a less is more kinda person in all aspects of life . . and that includes children! LOL!

    • kathleenkat profile image

      kathleenkat 4 years ago from Bellingham, WA

      "In the average large to very large family, not only the Duggars, children are indeed raising themselves. Parental attention is nil to nonexistent in the large family environment because two people are incapable of giving individualized attention to such a large brood of children."

      Could the same not be said of children of single working parents? What we called "latch-key" kids growing up; kids who carried a house key because they got home from school before their parents, kids who knew how to microwave TV dinners and ramen, and kids who had to do their own laundry. I, myself, learned how to travel at a young age hundreds of miles on Grayhound bus across country because my parents could not see eachother even to pick me up or drop me off. These kids were pretty much considered raising themselves, and sad product of divorce, because they spent many hours alone, by themselves, without any parental attention.

      I don't think it's the size of the family that matters. A child can be just as neglected if they are with a single parent, or if they are orphans, or in foster care, etc etc...

      I think the question here is how many is too many? It really depends on the parent/s. One child may be too many for the single mom who works as a flight attendant. 10 children may be too many for a work-from-home dad and the stay-at-home mom. But it really depends. The Duggars? I would say that they have 'kept it together' well enough not to get their children taken away from them, which is more you can say for some single parents (who turn to drugs and alcohol, etc) with only one or two children.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Single parents are different. Single parents are working to support their families. Yes, children of single parents oftentimes have to look after themselves. Single parents do try to keep the family together but sometimes the other party can be at fault. Many single parents did not want to be that way but were forced due to circumstances.

      The Duggars wanted to be broodmares without considering the effect on their everpresent family. They frankly care about their own base and selfish needs over that of their children. The average single parent is not that way. The average single parents work day and night to provide food and other amenities to their children. The majority of single parents are not that way by choice, there were extenuating circumstances. The Duggars wanted to be narcisstic, selfish broodmares who care nothing at all about their children.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      " I would say that they have 'kept it together' well enough not to get their children taken away from them, which is more you can say for some single parents (who turn to drugs and alcohol, etc) with only one or two children."

      That is a generalization. I wonder what percentage of larger families are for religious reasons. Isolation is a good way to keep them off drugs.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 4 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I would say over 80% of large to very large families are for religious reasons. The average parent who has a large to very large family van be classified as very traditionally religious, uneducated or undereducated, impoverished, and/or poor.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 4 years ago

      someone on the 19K facebook page said they had 10 kids a few days ago. I said 10 little tax credits and I obviously won't be able to live it down. They accuse me of having a chip on my shoulder. I said how come the larger families can criticize everyone else but not the other way around? There is a large family FB page that puts down anyone who lives differently than them. I wonder who has the chip on their shoulder. There is no telling what kind of response I will get lol It is fun to stir up the pot over there. This is nothing against Christianity since i was raised in it. I wonder if the Duggars were another ethnic background would they get the same reaction from fans.

    • Bridget 4 years ago

      I watched last night when Jordyn got her head stuck in the hellish bannister. Her brothers and sisters, save Josiah, all laughed at her and so did Michelle. She didn't cry and JB said it was not funny. They did get her out and she ran to her sisters. I watched the Stephen King movie "Storm of the Century" and little Pippa Hatcher got her blond head stuck in the day care bannister. None of the adults laughed at her, but the other students were laughing until the teacher told them not to. Her father, Hatch came along with the chief-of-police who was married to the day care director. Her dad told her not to yank because she would rip her ears off. They didn't monkey with her head and neck to get her out. Officer Mike pressed Pippa's nose to make her think her head was shrinking and they helped her out. Hell, on "Full House" DJ tried to calm the kid she was baby sitting down when he got his head bannister stuck until her dad came. They all shouldn't have laughed at Jordyn because she was stuck. Jessica McClure's mom didn't whe she fell in the well.

    • cls 4 years ago

      The very SADDEST and shocking thing about the duggars is that when Josie came and mom lived by the hospital and stayed at the hospital most of the time -Did anyone stop to think where those toddlers were? She had at least one other baby who lost her mother when she went to care for Josie!! who was caring for all those little ones while their mom was with josie which I think was about 6 months? If those young children were okay with their mom disappearing then it just shows that it's normal for her to be busy or away and that someone else raising them is normal and to me that is so sad, children being raised by siblings? I guess when you see the bedrooms and see that the little ones sleep with the older daughters you see the proof, to me that is nothing to be proud of, to explore or see on tv. I watch the show but not because I agree or admire, I watch because I am astonished that such obvious neglect and abuse is shown as something positive, something to admire and even aspire to? It is really crazy. I think this is one family where one of the children will break away from the brainwashing and write a book about the real deal and I can't wait to read it !!

    • Bridget 4 years ago

      It was gross on the "Michelle Duggar's Makeover" when the older girls, from Jana to Joy all decorated the hotel room their parents were staying at with rose petals and all of them were trying to make it romantic, even with a sign that said "Be fruitful and multiply" on the mirror. The decorating is more suited for a young married couple, not a couple who use their sex organs too many times! It would have been less gross if JB and Michelle were both young and their friends did the decorating, not their daughters!

    • Marge 3 years ago

      Hi Bridget,

      JB joked on national TV how he and his wife are having fun trying for another baby. Gag me. This is what a good Christian man says in front of his children? As old as I am I can still remember when the thought of my parents having sex was repulsive. Doesn't a good Christian husband and father have some concern for the safety of his wife, who nearly died in a previous pregnancy? Also, wouldn't it be nice if the older girls, considering they do all the work. could go somewhere for a weekend without hauling around kids, stay at a hotel, and go out and enjoy themselves? Maybe a weekend in the city or at the beach?

    • Elle 3 years ago

      What troubles me is that the GIRLS are responsible for raising the younger kids and the boys. The family practices the belief that the boys hold dominance in a family, and girls are to be submissive to them. A case in point: At prayer time every evening, the family gathers in the boys' dorm room. The boys sit or lay in their beds during their Bible study, while the girls sit in a circle on the floor. The girls have a sewing room attached to their dorm instead of a large closet, while the boys have their closet and a large playroom which is served by a through-the-floor slide from their room down into the playroom downstairs. When the famiy goes on their many TV show trips (i.e., NYC), the girls do the packing for the entire family. "If we let the boys do their packing, it would never get done," they chuckle. The parents did not grow up this way. Why are they taking their kids back to the 19th/early 20th century?

    • Elle 3 years ago

      One thing I've noticed in reading their book.... Dad has no problem outting Mom in her past struggles. That she dated several boys as a teen and that she "has a lot of baggage" about that... that she had an incident of stealing as a young teen on one occasion.... He has stated these situations as a sort of basis and justification for their extreme strictness with their children. They don't want their kids to date others, they expect early 20th century "courting"... all to prevent the "baggage" that dating can bring about. I don't think that Michelle has "baby hunger". I think that she has a deep sense of inner shame and dirtiness. I think she has the belief that submissiveness to her husband, and frequent childbirth and motherhood, will "cleanse" her in some way. I think she needs a psychologist.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      See Elle, there YOU go, not only Michelle.......but her husband also. Both parents NEED psychiatric help hence the title of THIS hub.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 3 years ago

      There's a difference in having a normal teen life and baggage Jim bob and Michelle talk about. It's like they make Michelle out to be some sort of slut in front of their kids when it was normal. And how much baggage could a 15 yr old have? Michelle also thinks her neiggbor divorced his wife because she mowed grass in a bikini top. I hardly would say so. In " A Love that Multiplies", Jim Bob asks the boys often if they have impure thoughts. How creepy. Michelle mentions she tells the girls romance novels are to women what porn is to men. Anyway IMO I think Jim Bob is like the awkward guy who landed the pretty cheerleader and jealous he wasn't the first..These people are perfect bait for cults whether they have 0 kids, 1 kid or 100.

    • ruth 3 years ago

      i got 1 son who is 13 years he is very love and i am very good mum and michelle and jimbob are very bad parents

    • Janelle 3 years ago

      I would agree that Jim Bob and Michelle are horrible parents. Maybe not horrible parents, but parents that are stretched way too thin. They might be great if they had a max of 4 or 5 kids, but 19 is ridiculous. When I was a teacher and had that many kids in my classroom, I remember feeling guilty because I felt like I didn't get as much one-on-one time with the students as I wanted. The poor Duggar kids are in that situation all day. It isn't humanly possible for those parents to give those kids the emotional support they need. They might as well be living in an orphanage! My husband worked with a lady who was the oldest of thirteen, and she was very resentful of her parents. She missed out on so much in her teenage years because she had to spend so much time taking care of her siblings. She was really robbed. She ended up getting married when she was twenty so she could get out of the house and have her own life.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Janelle, what you have succinctly stated is true. Children from large and very large families do not receive the prerequisite parental attention. They also suffer in other ways. You are so on target stating that oldest children in large and very large families do not have a childhood and end up hating their parents. I have written so many articles on large families and how children in such families suffer, feel free to read some of my hubs on large families.

    • Lacey 3 years ago

      I'm a social worker that works at a large urban shelter and I do mentoring and life skills for the kids living with their families. I don't know how many times I've had a kid come to me saying they hate their parents because they have no life due to the fact they need to take care of their younger sibling or siblings or younger kids that are "ADD" until they actually begin to get attention from their parent. I even had a single father of 12 state that he was about to give his kid to foster care because he didn't know how to deal with her behavior.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Lacey, you are right. Many children of large and very large families DO HATE their parents because they do not have the prerequisite parental attention. It is a KNOWN fact that many oldest/older children of large and very large families RESENT and HATE their parents because THOSE CHILDREN are the REAL PARENTS raising their younger siblings and those parents are nothing but sperm donors and incubators. You have succinctly stated HOW WRONG large and very large families are!

    • uk-usa 3 years ago

      I'm sure the Duggers show is as FAKE as can be, and is just silly entertainment for the masses. The Dugger family is run by smart, businesslike, and entertaining parents who are going for the American dream and if some TV producers find that worth paying them handsomely for then more power to them. I find nothing wrong with them or their huge family. At least the Duggers are married, and their children are not the result of welfare scrubs. The kids look and behave normally, and I just can't see any of them becoming gangbangers later in life.

      Also, there is something sinister about the way you keep defending your negative opinion about these people. I get the distinct feeling you wrote the article on the Dugger family because you were a government worker who can't stand not being in control of some white woman's womb.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      I don't know which family sickens me more, the Duggars or the Kardashians. Both seem dysfunctional!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Both; however, the Kardashians are normal in comparison to the Duggars. At least, Mrs, Kardashian is letting her daughters have a normal and free life. Michelle is enslaving hers.

    • Redd 3 years ago

      This Family is definitely different I mean the oldest Son Josh is following in his Fathers footsteps Baby number 3 already.What ever happened to dreaming about going to College after School?

      I'm not here to criticize but seems these Kids as they mature into Adulthood should have something forward to look to besides making babies even if they can provide for them.TLC is getting to be out of hand just check out the show Honey Boo Boo but these Families bring this on themselves.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Hey GM how are you?

      I wonder about Chris Jenner and how much she is letting her daughters have a "normal and free life" she has orchestrated every part of her daughters' lives. From Kim's sex tape to her younger girls posing in photos in scanty clothing. With Chris Jenner it is all about the SEX and exploitation of her children. In a sense, she too enslaves her children because if they do not promote the family biz "reality (trash) TV" they run the risk of losing mommy's love.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I am fine thank you and how are you, Askme. Thank you for stopping by and responding.

    • Huntgoddess profile image

      Huntgoddess 3 years ago from Midwest U.S.A.

      It's nobody's business how these people choose to live, as auntwackie says, above.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      True the Duggars are "Free" to live their lives as they see fit and we are free to express our viewpoints even if they are opposite and in disgust of these parents' lack of self-control or literal interpretation of biblical scriptures.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, YOU are truly the intelligent voice of reason regarding this hub. People are NOT FREE to do as they please WHEN THEY HARM OTHERS. The Duggars are HARMING their children particularly the OLDEST/OLDER ones. It takes an insightful and intelligent person such as yourself to see through the Duggar mental malaise. I do not see how people agree with that abnormally dysfunctional lifestyle. Askme, SOME people are SLOW................

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Thank you GM. If we see someone abusing their child, we have an obligation to report them to the authorities and not say "it is none of my business".

    • Anonymous 3 years ago

      You people are all extremely hypocritical!

    • NiaLee profile image

      NiaLee 3 years ago from BIG APPLE

      I am not going to enter any religious or sociological debate. I talk as a human being, a woman, a mother, a sister, a daughter.

      I never watched the show after two ten minutes attempts. It seems to me that people get confused and believe that this forced unconsciously stuck smiley happy mug they show around convinces a lot of people disappointed by the moral destruction in the free world, especially in America as a testimony of happiness.

      Women are being used and overused, not allowed to be full human being with their rights, they are kept like hen in a coop, keep on having children, which makes them grow old faster, threatens their health physically and mentally. That allows the men to be able to dominate the relationship ad vitam eternam. Imagine those hormones hitting high and low, these back, hand and stomach pains, the stretching of the body, the swelling of hands and feet... And during that time, the older kids are forced to accomplish so much for others. Love God and live your life, but when the children are isolated, controlled and depraved of education and personal experience, yes, the picture is perfect, but we all know that pictures a nothing like reality.

      Don't they have a daughter that escaped and dared live a @#$%^& life according to them.

      I respect faith and religion as long as it respects human rights ; and women and children rights in particular.

      I love those men who are ok with being God in their home, have slave women and kids. Men, I understand you but please, don't convince us women that being the slave of a selfish controlling man is the ideal IT IS NOT!

      Let me state: I am a stay at home mom of three with a international education and experience. I believe some of the girls are really happy like that, but I also believe that some of them don't really have a choice and stick because of pressure, dying quietly inside.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Amen NiaLee. You summed up what everyone (and me included) are thinking. My disgust with the Duggars is not about their choice of religion or lifestyle but the stifling of their children and not allowing their children to become informed adults who believe because they "believe" say "yes" when they want to say yes and equally have freedom to say "no" when they mean no. I truly believe as you do, some of the girls in this family are slowly dying inside and probably true for the boys too. These children are not being taught self-sufficiency or being true to who they really are. What happens if one or more of the children are suppressing gay tendencies? What happens if one of the children is truly artistic and wants to explore their passion? Go into acting? Be a musician (one that plays something other than religious based music)? All of these individual things are denied to these children by their slap-happy, controlling parents. I do not care how nice mama and papa Duggar try to show themselves, they are not kind or loving to these kids. When you imply that your love will be taken away should a child try to assert his true self, you are anything BUT loving and kind. You do not have your child's best interests at heart.

      I think it is known that when people suppress their true feelings or are never allowed to say, do be what they want to be, they are miserably unhappy and have a whole host of mental and addiction problems. Wait and see.....

    • Jen29 3 years ago

      Please state were your information or studies can be found. Otherwise, be honest when declaring your opinions but, do not claim a scientific fact without citation.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Jen29 not sure whom your post is directed to but as far as "scientific" studies go, they are only as good as the information put in and can be slanted to support whatever side the one doing the experiment is leaning.

      I do not have any citations but common sense would support it costs a ton of money to raise one child let alone 19 plus. I think in the USA the last quote I heard was about $100,000 until the age of 18? That does not include paying for college.

      There are only 24 hours in a day. If you have 19 plus it is obvious you cannot even give 10 mins exclusively to one child. And...if you are constantly having newborns (who take up a lot of time in the early days) you have NO time at all.

      The tendency to turn older children into live-in nannies is necessary. The Duggars do not, from what I have seen, employ outside help. No free time for the older kids. No allowing them to find out who they are, what THEY believe, what they like do not like.

      Older children, teens who do not have free time to go through the stages toward maturity, will at some point in their lives have to go through them for if they do not, they may turn inward and become alcoholics, drug abusers--very angry people. My mom was the oldest in a family of 10. She did all the work around the house as her mom was constantly in bed either because she was pregnant or recovering from having yet another baby. Her younger brothers all struggled with alcoholism. They were denied a childhood and forced to work at a very young age to help support an ever growing family.

      Forcing anyone to model themselves after you , rather than promoting your child in becoming the person they should be, is living a lie.

      When you are not true to yourself and wake up one day finding yourself having lived to "please" your domineering parents, I think you will be a very unhappy person. Just look at Lindsey Lohan. Her stage, pushing mom and dad made her who she is today. Although the Duggars are not the Lohans, they maybe polar opposites but more similar in the fact both do not respect their children and their individuality. The want to control every aspect of the children's lives.

      Studies, eh...over rated. Common sense should tell you big families such as the Duggars are destine for problems.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, some people get DON'T get it. Anyone who is remotely logical knows that it is IMPOSSIBLE to give a large number of children INDIVIDUAL attention. Sometime have got to give, some children will be loved and nurtured while others will suffer neglect and be on their own. In large families, parents do not raise the children the majority of the time, it is the OLDEST/OLDER children who have to give up their formative years to be parents. That is WRONG and tantamount to child abuse.

      Askme, you are correct in saying that life in large families are very tenuous. I have written several hubs on the subject. Children in large families endure a HELL on earth. They have no childhoods, many have to quite school to support their families. I have stated that in my hubs on the subject. Even those who "PURPORT" to "LOVING" being in a large family are in DEEP, DEEP DENIAL. That is why so many of them are jealous of us who were reared in small families. We of small families had a childhood, did not have to raise our siblings, and could complete our education. Children from large families live a HARD life! They KNOW it . The large family is Luciferian in its premise. I am not religious but using this as an analogy. In large families, everything is inverse. Children are adults, they perform duties that parents should perform. They assume adult roles at very young ages. They support the family instead of the parents. They raise themselves and siblings instead of the parents. There is little or no relationships with the parents. Yes, something is totally amiss in large families.

      The average large family is usually less educated, more religious, and more conservative than small families. Many oldest children in large and very large families(wrote a hub on this, Askme, please, please check it out), are angry and actually hate their parents for not having a normal formative childhood. Large families are pathological and dysfunctional as I have stated in one of my hubs on the subject. The only person who is happy in large and very large families are......YOUNGEST children. Of course, they are babied by parents and mostly likely, older siblings and do not have to go through the trials and tribulations of the oldest children.

      Now, to domineering parents. Domineering parents have children who will eventually hate them or disassociate themselves from them. Many parents love their children on condition whether they admit to it or not. Only a few parents accept and love their children unconditionally. Askme, you are spot on with your analysis as usual. Have a Blessed Day!

    • jeaniemce 3 years ago

      a rejoinder to gmwilliams...... your tendentiously non-self-effacing prepossession, judgemental and dismissive disdain of large families is more a commentary on your own deficiencies in understanding and accepting diversity than it is a commentary on the liabilities or attributes, the benefits or disbenefits, of being raised in brobdingnagian-sized families. you should temper your remarks w/ the caveat that you are not an expert in the field of psycho-socio-economic purlieux of families who have philoprogenitively pullulated more than 2 progeny. yes, even i, the atheist mother of 7 children [2 daughters, 5 sons] am stun-polled at the crazed duggars' issuance of "19-and- counting" lads and lassies. nevertheless, your attitude toward what you assess as hyper-abundant families [more than 2] is imperious, anecdotal, dogmatic, and a sweeping generalization. a plethora of your otherwise thought-provoking remarks does not reflect the reality of many behemoth but intact families who successfully procreate and guide, as parental cynosures, responsible, compassionate, intellectually vibrant, environmentally aware, inenarrably sensitive, out-going, creative, and palpably engaged adults in the individual ambits within which they function. every family is a selcouth, unique entity, some more singular than others. however, each family member should be judged by his/her own meritorious or deleterious outcome, not by the number of children the parents have birthed. given that your attitudinal predispositions are anecdotal and arbitrary, i will comply w/ my own anecdotal observations, as i am a marine and aquatic invertebrate zoologist, not a sociologist, psychologist, or family counsellor.

      the family from which i derived was comprised of 6 children, 3 daughters and 3 sons. we were the 'issue' of a veterinarian specializing in equine surgery and a full-time teacher. all were well-educated [2 VMD's, one LLD, 2 MA's, 2 PhD's]. our mother birthed her 6 tatterdemalions in 9 years, and did not breastfeed a single one of us. concomitantly, the sibling rivalry in our family was vicious and remains so to this day, despite our being in our 60's and 70's. the draconian rule in our house was to 'defer to the elder', and it was relentlessly adhered to, despite the conflict, animosity, and exploitation of the younger siblings such a domestic diathesis engendered.

      my husband and i, on the other hand, decided we would raise our 7 children w/ the antithetical apothegm, 'defer to the younger', and that we would spread the multitude of our philoprogenitive load over many years. thus, we were 26 and 28 when our first was birthed and 48 and 50 when our 7th pullulation arrived... a period of 22 years, w/ an average of 3~4 years between each pregnancy. because we were determined to raise them ourselves rather than by a nanny, we instaurated our own international environmental consulting firm [my husband is a resource economist specializing in sustainable resource harvesting] so that we could spell each other in the rearing of our rugrats. the kismet windfall of that decision created a family dynamic diametrically divaricating from the family dynamic in which i derived. despite our children's being raised overseas, primarily in 'developing' countries such as sierra leone, malaysia, nepal, the caribbean islands, cambodia, egypt, papua new guinea, and the hashemite kingdom of jordan, are several years apart in age, and all lead independent professional lives, each one is ineffably devoted to his/her siblings. our first son is v-pres. of research and development w/ tervita, and holds a PhD in chemical limnology from the univ. of alberta; our second son, w/ a PhD in alternative energy resources research and development, is director of strategic initiatives for the alberta ministry of energy; our first daughter is now a full-time mother in quebec, w/ a degree in geography and sustainable forestry from queens' university; our third son is a JD [doctorate of jurisprudence] from the univ. of victoria, labouring for the ministry of lands and forests on behalf of the indigenous peoples of canada's land-rights claims; our 2nd daughter earned an MSc in field naturalist studies from the univ. of vermont and is on staff w/ the nature conservancy [TNC] in ottawa; our 4th son graduated from harvard univ. w/ a double major in astronomy & astrophysics and earth & planetary science and is teaching at a university in san fernando in the philippine islands; our youngest recently graduated from vassar in computer and cognitive science, and is presently in training at brown univ. for a 2-year posting w/ VENTURE FOR AMERICA.

      re-reading this posting has struck me w/ more than a mild frisson of bumptious rodomontade; in fact, it seems ignobly saturated w/ braggadocio. please allow me to apologize. my intention on your blogging site was not to pompously pontificate, but to suggest that not all families are 'dysfunctional' due to the number of members a particular family spawns. your punctilious pronunciamento is too simplistic a variable, yet you seem to importune that variable as an all-encompassing factor in the familial equation. family dynamics are infinitely more complex. for example, my 6 siblings are parlous successful professionally, but hopelessly arrogant, self-centered, jealous, competitive, and tendentiously cruel to their siblings, whereas the 7 children my husband and i raised are kind-hearted, compassionate, loving, devoted to each other, and altruistic, despite being atheistic/agnostic, like their parents, and despite each one's being just a wee arpeggio in the dance of life surrounding their individual circumstances, successes, and position in our 9-member family.

      please do not judge every large family, as you seem wont to do, w/ such a broad stroke of disapprobation and opprobrium; it bespeaks of arrogance, inappropriate condescension and 'de-haut-en-bas', as if you were the guru, spokesperson, and oracle for everyone else's unique family dynamics. humbly and diversely yours, jeanie mce

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Jeaniemca: obviously you are highly educated and intelligent but I have a theory about people who feel the need to use "big" words, especially those from large families--there is an insecurity and need to be heard.

      You raised good points. I think one thing that separates your experience of coming from a large family versus the Duggars is that your parents and now you as well, had children which you knew you could care for, provide attention to, enable their emotional well-being and educated them. You allowed your children to experience different things in life, diversity, education, travel, giving back to society--all wonderful things you and your husband should be rewarded for. You did not stifle your children from exploring and learning. Holding education in high regard. The Duggars...eh not so much. They control, manipulate and limited each of their children into traditional roles of girls: subservient, boys: wage earners. I don't think the Duggars promote or encourage education outside of their limited bible based home schooling.

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      valid points all, 'askme'.... as the lion's share of your comments are. what i objected to in some of your postings was the intransigent, subjective, and fastuous declaratives issued w/out a scintilla of quantifiable evidence from trained professionals in the academic ambits of family counsellors, sociologists, and clinical or child psychologists. nor do i pretend [despite my pretentious sesquipedalian lexicon] to have any expertise in these fields... which is why i could only contribute anecdotal information from my own subjective experiences as a daughter and mother. managing a loving, compassionate, and inquiring gaggle of 7 goslings was inordinately challenging, but 19 seems unalloyed, categoric insanity!

      you are correct... i was not as strong as my multiple siblings; i was thin, thewy, and wiry whilst they were robust and amazonic. so the only way i could protect or defend myself in our contentious and disputatious household was to battle w/ words they did not understand, which left them sufficiently befuddled they would dismissively snort, then march away... leaving me be, which was, of course, the ultimate outcome i sought. most insightful to have detected that, 'askme'.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, again the point is proven. In large families, there is some type of discord or another, even in the wealthiest and/or affluent of families. In large and very large famlies of 6 and more children, SOMEONE is NOT going to have his/her needs met. There is ALWAYS going to be sibling competition and/or rivalry of one type or another. Even in the wealthiest of families, the oldest will somehow be responsible for the youngest siblings, that it de rigueur in large families. Also in large families, there is GOING to be intense sibling compeition for parental attention.

      The sibling dynamic in large families is highly competitive and intense. The poster in question have proven my point regarding the large family dynamic. Children in large families, rich, poor, middle class, DO NOT receive adequate or the individualized attention they need. SOME are going to receive all the attentin (the younger ones in the family) while the older children are going to be discarded and side lined. The poster in question exhibited this in her answers. Although she vehemently denied the things I have stated, SHE nevertheless confirmed wihat I'VE ALWAYS stated about the large family dynamic. People from large and very large famlies may proclaim ever so strongly "HOW HAPPY" they are, they convey in one way or another that THEY ACTUALLY WEREN'T as this poster has done.

      You see Askme, people from large and very large families LOVE to criticize us from small families. They can do that anything they want and have in the past. However, when their dysfunctional lifestyle is critiqued by sociologists, psychologists, and other social scientists, THEY are in an uproar. Well, too bad. There are MORE benefits of being in a small family than there is of being in a large family. The poster in question has aptly demonstrated this. That is why I elected not to personally respond to her post.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, I wanted to add that the poster in question clearly demonstrates what happens when children DO NOT receive adequate and individualized parental attention. This is very typical in large and very large families. EVERYONE I know and/or have encountered who is from a large and/or very large family has attention issues. They are ALWAYS seeking attention in one form or another.

      There was a woman at work, the oldest of 8 children, who was ALWAYS bemoaning how NO ONE paid attention to her and usurped any one at work who received supervisory notice. She did this to me all the time. A mother from a large family who was jealous of her only child because she received MORE praise than she did. This mother DIDN'T like this one point.

      Yes, people from large and/or very large families have deep psychological issues from lack of parental attention as children. It is evident in the majority of them. You can see the angst in their posts, they have to vent because they are in denial regarding their family situation and that they received so little attention as children.

      That is WHY children from large and/or very large families are ENVIOUS of children from small families. Children from small families receive much individualized parental time and attention. Children from large and/or very large families raise themselves and each other. They HAVE to, their parents are seldom available to them. I would NOT wish a large family on my very worst enemy. Large families are indeed deleterious and detrimental to children psychoculturally, psychologically, and socioecnomically.

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      on the contrary, 'askme', my 7 children do not 'have deep psychological issues' as you suggest, nor are they 'envious of small families', nor have they, or myself for that matter, EVER criticized, derogated, vilified, or at any time pilloried those from exiguous families as you have so dogmatically declared.

      i suspect you are the one suffering from 'deep psychological issues' given how defensively you appear to arrogate your position. you have prognosticated a psycho-social outcome that is far too draconian to have universal or ubiquitous relevance. your broad-stroke brush does not propine credence to the selcouth variability that reigns extant in every species, including our own, 'Homo sapien sapiens' [yes, we are, by neoteric DNA analysis, classified as a subspecies of 'homo sapiens']. you have not integrated a scintilla of my sapience from decades of experience as daughter, sister, mother-of-multitudes, and grandmother-of-many into your discriminatory and quite imperious equation regarding familial dynamics. precisely because i provenanced from such a disputatious and competitive family, whose father strapped us for the most exiguous infraction, whose mother did not breastfeed us, who left us alone at night to cry ourselves to sleep, and who refused to respond to us when we were overwrought w/ cauchemars or nightmares ["to toughen us up"], who forced the younger to perpetually defer to the elder who then commensurately exploited their power-position... it was, consequently, from our past family backgrounds, that my husband and i decided we would endeavour to reverse that deleterious dynamic and create a familial equation wherein such variables were factored in as: 1] deferring to the youngest who were preternaturally helpless; 2] breastfeeding each of our 7 until s/he self-weaned; 3] co-sleeping in a family bed wherein each member was free to leave in order to gain privacy whenever s/he deemed it time to do so; 4] adhering to weekly job-postings, the demands of which were dictated by each child's age and ability to address and implement said-tasks; 5] 2-hour long reading sessions each night as a group, quondam to their baths, the sessions of which depended on age-determined interest levels. the younger were read to by the parents or elder children until they were keen to read individually, in solitude, which usually occurred around ages 7~9, depending on the predilections of the child.

      my own parents NEVER read adventuresome, scientifically challenging, or elucubrating literature to their 'issue; they only quoted passages from a biblical text [which seemed satanaic in the absurd] and compelled us to recite the 'lord's prayer'... not a word of which seemed in the slightest relevant to the life of a curious child in search of meaningful connections to those in his/her familial, social or academic diathesis.

      i concomitantly attribute my 7 children's predispositions, not just academically, familially, and socially, but also in terms of their ineffable compassion for others and their unquantifiable respect, admiration, and devotion to each of their 6 siblings, to their being raised in a family dynamic dramatically diametric to the family in which i was raised, a dynamic which was amplified by their being nurtured in an international ambit of singularly impoverished but loving third- and fourth-world cultural purlieux, wherein each child was nurtured to do one's best despite his/her economic deprivations.

      your frog-bog blog fails to acknowledge and incorporate into its imperiously militated milieu the diversity that is regnant throughout successful families arising from the multitude of unique cultures across this arguably benighted planet that all of us call 'home'.

      i humbly acknowledge that the most ineffable lessons i have learned in the rearing of my own 7 children have sourced from the extraordinarily dedicated, responsible, loving, tho' often brobdingnagian families that we have had the privilege to live amongst during our 5 decades as international environmental consultants for such INGOs as WWF, IUCN, CUSO, CIDA, UNDP, the world bank, UNEP, USAID, DANIDA, OAS, IRF, gulf canada resources, FFARM, CEMA, SDC, and GEF.

      please do not be so imprudent, injudicious, or cavalier as to prognosticate the outcome of every behemoth family by your own limited and circumscribed venues, whether via your reading, personal background, or anecdotal experiences. w/ empressement, jeanie mce

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      It was not askme who wrote the 2 responses. It was ME, the hub author, in response and in concurrence with askme's post. I, the hub author, was the ONE who wrote the LAST two posts, not askme. I, the hub author, elected to elaboratively respond to askme's post regarding the issue at hand. So please do not fault askme, she did not write the last two posts. It was I, the HUB AUTHOR, who wrote the last 2 responses elucidating psychsocial issues regarding the large family.

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      my heartfelt apologies to 'askme' for confusing her post w/ yours. thank you for bringing this contretemps to my attention, gmwilliams.

    • Manny 3 years ago

      What i dont get.. Is that the parents grew up 'normal' they went to public school. Wore pants (michelle) I dont understand how/why they would scrap their past life and brainwash these kids in a whole new lifestyle.. It boggles my mind.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      So true Manny. "Do as I say, not as I do" mentality does nothing to teach kids anything other than you are a hypocrite.

    • Jos Drew 3 years ago

      Reply to jeaniemce , so to put simply forth for your beautifully scripted art, ( Expand your horizons , don't be ignorant or make assumptions, educate yourself , nurture and love your children. , live and experience diversity in this narrow minded backwords world. )

      I can comprehend the Jist of what you wrote and your large family . I cannot comprehend the Dudd type family. You sound like a pretty interesting person that I could enjoy a cup of java with .

    • jeaniemce 3 years ago

      @jos drew: a mug of java... yum! is there a more esculent beverage sourced from our planet's enriched soils, particularly those bespattered throughout developing countries, than the java bean? [tho' now the original beans from the indonesian island of java have been superceded and surpassed by those nurtured in the highlands of cambodia's and papua new guinea's soils.] commensurately, there is no more gratifying interregnum than sipping said-elixir in the company of open-minded, non-judgemental, cordial, compassionate friends and new acquaintances... someone like you, i surmise. thank you for your concordant and sympathetic response. warm java-jumps and jollifications to you.

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      @noyb: it does seem fastuous [haughty] for so many bloggers in cyberspace to be arrogating pronouncements about other lads' and lassies' lives when one could be spending his/her time more productively being of service to others, rather than indulging in gormless, 'de-haut-en-bas' judgements of people w/ whom one is not even acquainted. being judgemental appears to be an intractable trait in the human genome. drawing attention to this regrettable DNA- derived trait was the conative motivation for dipping into this blog-site 3 months ago when my husband [74] and i [72] were compelled to return to canada from our home in northeastern cambodia [near the laos/vietnam border] to undergo urgent surgeries and other serious medical issues that importuned our presence here.

      we do not have a television, and our 7 children were raised in third- and fourth-world countries w/out access to this electronic drug [no, we are not missionaries; we are international environmental consultants. in fact, our family members are atheists, agnostics, nullifidians, and humanists]. none of us has ever viewed the duggar TLC program, nor any other program slopped up from the idiot-box trough [i'm being judgemental again]. i learned about the duggars and the octomom from the internet. when i subsequently realized how conclamantly large-to-brobdingnagian-sized families were being savaged across cyberspace, and w/ such a broad stroke, i was inspired to poke my oar in the water in order to remind myself and others [i too had peremptorily disdained the duggars and octomom as loonies] that sweeping and subjective generalizations, particularly regarding other families, are usually falsifications of reality and often redound to destructive societal forces rather than to cohesion. that said, i apologize for adding yet more pretentious chuntering and sesquipedalian tautologies to your otherwise unblemished [i hope] day.

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      ….of course, judging others to assess their worth or value to society is endemic to our species: teachers and professors evaluate their students; employers evaluate their employees; courtroom judges and juries adjudicate against malfeasing miscreants; coaches judge their players; literary and art critics judge struggling authors and artisans; parents critique, praise, admonish, and redress their children…. however, i repine that we are unnecessarily censorious and condescending in our collective censures of others and how they choose to carry out their limited lives, i.e. their wee moments in the vast geological spectrum.

      our villifying attitudes threaten concinnity and do nothing to promote consuetude. as a septuagenarian, i can aver that the aging process has mollified my tendentious predilection for derogating those who do not spin out their lives under the same banner as mine, or whose pathways are not lit by the same cresset as mine.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Jeanie, I think you've missed the point entirely about blogging, social media--it is all about interacting and stating opinions. Curious, if TV is the "electronic drug" what do you call it when you and others spend so much time posting online at various sites?

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      what i mean to convey, askme, is that i would not want you to be the victim of too much disposable time in your life as a result of enforced convalescence from major surgery... far more advantageous to the psyche is to be up and about dancing, gambolling, and coruscating thru the celestial spheres than spin-drifting one's energies on categoric and imperious declaratives regarding metaphoric tramontanes about whom one has no personal knowledge nor investment in....

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      jeanie, I know you like to impress us all with your vast vocabulary but when the average person cannot tell you the difference between they're, there or their, your comments are lost in translation.

      No..I really do not have disposable time and blogging or hubbing as it is called on hubpages, provides passive income. Just like GMWilliams the author of this article, I too have a Hubpage with over 50 published articles. Hubbers a/k/a bloggers are paid by the advertisers who list their ads on each article--see the ads posted around this published hub?

      Additionally, I spend 8 paid hours online working for a major insurance carrier remotely from my home. Not having to commute to an office does free up some time that I can blog so I guess you could call them disposable, however, with the advancements made in technology, I can blog on my cell phone, transfer money from bank account to bank account, answer emails all while riding in a car on the way to a museum, an art show, hiking, wine tasting while my hubby drives. So...I like to call it multi-tasking not disposable time because disposable implies "throwing out" or "wasting" when it is very obviously I am making the most with the time I have.

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      good for you, askme; you must be a highly productive hubber, blogger, cell-phone operator, insurance-carrier employee, bank-account transfer maven, museum afficionado, art-show avatar, hiker, wine-taster, devoted wife, and a most energetic person.

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      @askme: ...and i agree w/ you; my pretentious lexicon of sesquipedalian, oft-archaic yakkity-yak has been a life-long nemesis which tends to alienate rather than unite thru language [w/ the exception of students cramming for their SAT verbal exams or uni-entrance exams]. the above comment was not intended to sound patronizing; you do reflect an altogether energetic and energizing persona.

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      ... an enterprising lassie as well.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      I know Jeanie. Frankly, I thought I deleted my comment.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      LOL, enterprising yes. Too much energy and desire to make income in various streams. Having lost a job, started a business then went bust when the economy took a dive, I find I do not want to have all my eggs in one basket and therefore, look for ways to have income diversity. Not that the pennies on Hubpages would support me, but little drops in a bucket.

    • Tricia 3 years ago

      I have stumbled upon this after doing some research on this family. I have watched them on tv several times. I'm not saying they are a perfect family, hey who is, but I don't see the treachery that most of you do. I was raised in a family of six (I was the baby), my daddy was the "head honcho," my mom usually did the housewife thing (though she did clean houses for a living), my siblings and I were in a Pentecostal faith, and we lives non-materialisticoves. With all that being said, I do not agree that families with a large number of children are not happy and do not get adequate attention. I will admit my older sisters were my babysitters, but they did not solely "rear" me. My parents also whipped our tails if we were doing wrong. Now the "blanket training" is downright ridiculous and I hate to hear that anybody would do that. As for telling a toddler no and swatting a toddlers hand for getting into stuff they shouldn't, I'm pretty sure every parent has done that at least once. It's called discipline. For the remarks of them not being in public schools, I don't blame them! There is so much violence today. Not only shootings, but bullying is worse than it has ever been. If I had the means, I would homeschool my children. Not all young adults go to college, it's not for everyone. I see nothing wrong with their sons owning their own businesses and such. Two of the girls, I believe, are going into midwifery. That is a profitable and enlightening career.

      I've also seen where people have said its not fair that they can't date alone and such. I don't blame them there either. Has anyone watched MTV's Teen Mom saga? Or heard of the booming teenage pregnancies? That is because most parents don't even know their children are dating, let alone what else they are out there doing. Now that I'm older and married, I wish I would have saved myself for my husband. My parents were strict with me, but didn't pay as close of attention to me since I was the only one at home and they had gotten older in age (once I was a senior in high school).

      Modesty should be taught to our young girls!!! I walk down the street and see 12 year olds wear "booty shorts" and tank-tops. They are raised to crave a boys attention, this is due to what is shown on tv and through the Internet. I do not blame the Duggers for limiting those outlets. I have child locks on my TVs.

      Most of you will claim that I am simple minded or "stuck in old times," but I agree with many of their "teachings."

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Actually Tricia according to the Center for Disease Control teen pregnancy is at an all time low across all ethnic lines. As for MTV's Teen Mom that show did more to promote birth control and downplay the attraction of getting pregnant.

      I agree with you about 12 year old girls walking in "booty shorts" and "tank tops" I am totally opposed to the sexy dressing for girls and for adult women as well. With all the advances in women's rights, I do not understand why people like Lady GaGa, Britney Spears, and even old timer Madonna have to dress like pole dancers at a strip club. Even in Los Angeles where I live, the female news reporters and anchors dress inappropriately, with cleavage hanging out all over--just do not get it. When I started in business, we had to "dress for success" and down play any sexy look for fear of not being taken seriously...guess I am old school in that respect.

      As for the Duggars, I find it offensive that her womb is used as a pit stop and it is IMPOSSIBLE to have time to give emotionally to each child. You came from a family of 6 and I am sure there was limited time your parents had with each of you, but could you imagine 19??

      I also do not like the hypocrisy of "no TV in our house" but appearing and making money by being on "TV"....you cannot argue that one, that is just plain contradictory.

    • Eschutter 3 years ago

      People like you and many of your supporters reflect some of the greatest evil and sources of hate in this world. Friendly and caring the Duggars only offend people who are generally offended by Christ anyway. It's not like they are bombing people or waging jihad. Maybe you've found enlightenment by now.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Eschutter: I am not "offended" by Christ at all. I consider myself Christian. I am offended by man-made religions who put their own spin on Christianity. Too many times fundamentalists, such as the Duggars are hypocrites and they often exploit Christ's teachings to fit their own warped view of life. "Greatest evil" what are you talking about? Pointing out the Duggars warped, dysfunctional, backward way of raising their children is not evil. What is evil is the Duggars following a brand of Christianity that does not allow for real emotion like acknowledging feelings of sadness, anger, unhappiness and forcing kids to mask those real emotions because the Duggars' beliefs call for happiness always--which is unreal. That my friend, is real evil!

      Is Warren Jeffs a "Christian" in your opinion? Would you be upset if we called him a pedophile who marries 12 year old girls? Or is doing that also being "generally offended by Christ anyway"? Wrong IS wrong and don't try to cover it up with Jesus Christ!

    • jeanie mceachern 3 years ago

      may i suggest that one should be offended by all religions and their ever-proliferating sects, given that every religion is 'man-made'? ... all religions are human-scripted mythologies, many of which are CONscripted to edulcorate and control the sequacious pursuivants among us who perpetually seek anodynes and palliatives for fear-saturated, ovine, and unquestioned lives.

    • Jen 3 years ago

      Seriously? I disagree with some of the Duggar's rigid gender roles and ideas but that doesn't mean they're wrong. The kids love their siblings and are healthy, happy, and well-adjusted. They live in an ENORMOUS house (it's 7,000 sq feet with a huge yard!!) and are well cared for. I think that it's unfortunate they probably don't get as much one-on-one time with mom and dad but kids who have parents who both work have the same issue. If you disagree with their choices, as I do in some areas, it doesn't mean that they're bad parents or a bad family. I work with survivors of domestic violence and their families. I know what destructive/dangerous families and loving families look like. The Duggars, while extreme in some cases, are definitely the latter. Just because you disagree doesn't make them wrong or dysfunctional.

    • Molly 3 years ago

      I am the oldest of three children which is a completely socially acceptable amount of children. One of my favorite things was taking care of my little siblings. I loved getting to hold them and walk with them and teach them how to do everything. We had babysitters half the time but I still wanted to be the one to take care of them. I didn't get to see my parents much because they both worked. Michelle probably sees the kids more than my parents did because they were so busy. They're different but they aren't bad like you say. Some of the older kids aren't seen taking care of the kids as much because they probably don't want to. And that's okay. I think you all are a little ridiculous.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Thank you all for responding. There are more Duggar hubs on HubPages if you wish to read them. There are at least 6 Duggars hubs.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      @Susan thank you for providing a good example of judging someone. I don't know what "public school" kids you are talking about, but having raised my two children and my two step-children who all attended public schools, I know them to be extremely kind, giving, and have tons of friends from all different backgrounds. Judging remarks like yours stating this "blog sucks" does nothing to promote your way of thinking, neither does the improper use of "there" when you should have used "their" as for "wine" I think you met "whine" or maybe you are just drinking too much wine? Either way, you are free to write your own opposing blog and tell us why you believe the Duggars are one great and wonderful family. Write on!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Askme, I bet that Susan is from a large family. I receive such negative comments which I DELETE. You have noticed how people of large families criticize OTHERS, particularly those from small families but don't anyone DARE to critique THE LARGE FAMILY. Notice when ANYONE critique THE LARGE FAMILY, the majority of them go into ATTACK MODE. I had TWO trolls try to comment THRICE on one of my hubs on the large family but to NO AVAIL. See the DOUBLE STANDARD HERE, Askme. Of course, they can write their viewpoint, but they are afraid to do because they are subconsciously UNHAPPY with their chosen lifestyle. That is when THEY attack, subconsciouly they are.........UNHAPPY and miserABLE. THEY know that I AM TELLING THE TRUTH and THE TRUTH HURTS, OUCH!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 3 years ago

      Interesting point GM. Maybe when you come from a large family it is GROUP think and go with the GROUP at all times? No one is allowed to think independently or risk being ostracized! Truth does hurt. I am surprised by the level of hostility and to think, these are the tame ones what were the ones like you deleted??

      Unhappy? I'll say.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Yes, as I have said in my hubs on large families, large families have a pack and/or group mentality. They do THINK in GROUPS. In large families, individuality is DISCOURAGED for that is viewed as seflishness in the large family environment. They are raised to be cogs and part of the whole dynamic. Again, that is why they HATE us people from small families, we are raised to think and be individuals and to have a sense of self. Again, the self is a onsidered a bad, even a curse word in the large family environment. What the negaters and haters from large families write their vitriolic and vituperative comments, they have VALIDATED a 1000% what I have said, Askme. Let THE GAMES begin. They are showing themselves for whom they are, LOVING IT, LOVING IT.

    • NiaLee profile image

      NiaLee 3 years ago from BIG APPLE

      Ladies, I do appreciate that discussion, without going as far as saying that they are unhappy, a lot of them are stuck in it and can't do or believe they can't do anything about it.

      I come from a large family in a large community and I was always an individual that loved people, parties and sharing but I am an individual... ouch! I had thoughts, feelings, ideas, hobbies, styles that were mine and not the group's.

      Early on, I made my choices, I always loved books, music and travelling: I became a target, a pariah, a designated guilty person of every kind of craziness!!!lol

      There are families, communities, religious groups and more that function like that, like sects, they want control, uniformity and almost forbid individuality up to the mind!

      I am sure that some large families have happy individuals like some are not and express it or not, like some only kids are miserable.

      We are all individuals and some like to morph into one big body controlled and responsible for everything. They follow and let "God", a father, a leader, a lady be the master and responsible person for everything. In many groups or families, the price for belonging is to be exactly what they want and do what they want, or else.

      I made the choice to be myself, it cost me a lot, I assure you I don't practice anything bad, I love and wish the best to all, but they really don't! Their acceptance requires a lot, almost slavery to the prayer or the thought, not to say actions.

      I respect others choices and take the right to be free and happy, peaceful and loving, not stuck, hateful, spiteful or even ignorant.

      Happy new year to you all

      Love and peace

    • Christy 3 years ago

      While I agree that in large families the older children help out a lot & babysit while parents are busy with younger children, Michelle seems to take it further. She assigns an older child to be their "buddy" which seems to mean a substitute mom. The older children have never been supervised so they are allowed to punish their buddy. We have heard then demand a sibling respond to them with "Yes Maam" Also Michelle brags about her blanket training. Fear is not respect. The grandchildren are not thrilled to go to Michelle. Sadly Josh is a clone of JimBob & Anna tries to copy Michelle. If she actually did all the raising of her own children, having babies may not seem so wonderful. She has them then hands them off an at an early age. She got to be a normal teenager. But she denies that to her own children. I think she fears losing her slaves. Some will never leave but I hope some leave & have their own lives.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 3 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Christy, in large and very large families, oldest children RAISE the younger ones. They are THE PARENTS of the family, not the actual parents who just aimlessly and mindlessly reproduce without being concerned of the ramifications of their actions upon the already existing children in the family.

      Parents of large and very large families just DON'T give a hoot about their children, especially emotionally, financially, and psychologically. They care only about what THEY want, not what their children want! The Duggars aren't the only large family parents who assign buddies to their oldest children, the overwhelming majority of parents of large families ROUTINELY do this to their older children.

      The life of oldest/older children in large families are akin to forced laborers and slaves. I believe that forced laboreres and slaves have it MUCH EASIER than oldest children in large and very large families who must be ON 24/7/365! Hell is heaven in comparison to the life of the oldest child in a large and very large family! I would not wish the life of an oldest child in a large and very large family on a fly!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      Jen @The Duggars haven't always lived in a 7000 sqft house. They lived in a 900 with like 8 kids sqft home surviving on church donations. It is bad when children don't get attention from parents daily. It is impossible with so many.Parents of two even working spend more time with their kids. They have to bathe and feed the kids, get homework, and put them to bed. Michelle and Jim Bob seldom do these things. Michelle told one of the kids to have your older sister get a snack for them. Little Jordyn has tried to get attention and Michelle just touches her on the arm. You also don't know if they are all happy just from 30 minutes.

      Why is the only choice raising kids to drink, wearing booty shorts or acting like Miley Cyrus? The Duggars are no different. They seem to almost boast about their lifestyle pretending they are perfect and better. It is easy to stay out of jail when you have never been tempted.If the Duggar belief system works, why don't they prove it? Prove it can keep kids out of trouble. Speaking of Madonna she came from a strict Catholic family of six siblings . Obviously she lacked attention.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Amanda, of course, children from large and very large family DON'T get parental attention. Children from large and very large families are born into a dysfunctional and inverse system where all roles are reversed. Children raise, even support themselves at a very young age because their parents do not have the wherewithal to adequate support a large brood of children.

      It is the parents' lackadaisicial atttidue that children simply do the best they can and if they cannot, tough! In large families, children must either sink or swim. Large family life is hardscrabbled; that is why children from large and very large families are rough and tough. Examples of these are Mark Wahlberg ( 9 kids in family) and Madonna(8 kids in family). Madonna constantly seeks attention and still acts as a teenager because she did not receive adequate attention from her parents. She admitted that during interviews. Mark Wahlberg, as a youth, sneaked out at night and participated in less than positive activities because he did not receive parental attention. You are right Amanda, children from large families DON'T receive attention and that is why they are more subject to indulge in less positive activities. Girls from large and very large families tend to get pregnant because they fell for the first guy who gave them attention; often w/ deleterious results.

      They exemplify children from large and very large families. They are rough, hardscrabbled, and instinctual. They are used to living on nothing or next to nothing. They are content being at the periphery of society. Amanda, the large family is different from the small family but in a dysfunctional and pathological way!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Amanda, I would like to add that typical parents of large and very large families(6 or more kids per household) really DON'T care about their children at all. That is apparent in the way the children are treated. The atmosphere in large and very large families is neglect, benign and otherwise. Parents of large and very large families ONLY CARE about THEIR SELFISH wants and needs without being concerned of the ramifications of their actions on their existing children. It is an addiction really; some are just addicted to baby hunger! They need psychological, no psychiatric help, really!

    • witchywoman 2 years ago

      Has anyone ever noticed that JimBob never does anything helping with the smaller children?Including just cuddling a baby. I think he's a selfish prick,only worrying about his hair and proving his virility by impregnating his wife. I don't watch this show anymore because I want to stomp JimBob for being so selfish!!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Witchywoman, OOOOOUCH. Both parents are selfish-only thinking about THEIR pleasures and wants, not giving a ---------- about the children. Well, Witchywoman, the average parents of large families are LIKE THAT. They do not spend time with their children, expect the children to raise themselves, and just mindlessly and aimlessly procreate ad infinitum.

      Thank you again for stopping by. I have more hubs on the dysfunctions of large family life if you are interested. Large families are a total detriment all around. Parents of large families are THE MOST SELFISH of parents. They really do not give a good rat's fig about their children. Their attitude towards their children is well, what the -------, let them do the best they can. Quite uncaring, don't you think?

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Witchywoman, let me add, parents of large families only care about the rudimentary reproduction of children. They seldom care about the children after they came into the world. They relegate the raising of the children to THE OLDEST CHILD of the family. The oldest child in large families are THE REAL PARENTS, NEVER the actual parents. The parents have NO part in raising and teaching their children. They delegate that to the OLDEST child. Parents of LARGE FAMILIES have it SO EASY, don't THEY?

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      Anyone who studies the Duggar knows they are members of Advanced Training Institute. The founder, Bill Gothard, has been place don administrative leave for sexual misconduct and possibly more. The number of kids pale in comparison to the things this man has been accused of. It disturbs me the Duggars allow their kids to be around him. In Fundamentalism, the victims often get blamed for their actions. There are around 34 accusations and several stories on Recovering Grace.org. Another organization they belonged to, Vision Forum, folded after the founder, Doug Phillips allegedly had an 'inappropriate' affair with a young woman. It shows you setting a gazillion rules do not work.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Thank you Amanda for clarifying this to the readers and to me. It is greatly appreciated in kind. I have read about Bill Gothard in the past.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Amanda, I also want to add that parents of large families exist in a surreal, bizarre universe. There is no logical way that parents can adequately and effectively raise more than 2 children by themselves. It is either impossible or near to impossible.

      However, parents of large families exist in fantasyland. They want the large family. The idea of the large family is planted in their minds and consciousness hence that is all they want. They do not care if they can afford to take care of their children financially, emotionally, and psychologically. All they see is THE LARGE FAMILY.

      Of course, this is unrealistic. Average parents CAN'T care for a large number of children. Never have, never will. Caring for a large brood of children is often insurmountable and onerous at best. It is quite daunting caring for a large amount of children. No parent can do this task by themselves. THEY SIMPLY CAN'T. It is difficult enough taking care of 2 children, let alone more. Imagine parenting 6 or more children, simply can't be done.

      It is de rigueur in large family life that the oldest/older children ARE going to be neglected or pressed into service to care for the youngest/younger one. Large families are unfair to the oldest/older children who must endure a childhood of servitude to their parents and younger siblings. However, the parents of large families DON'T care about that fact one scintilla. All they want is to do is have THAT large family. It borders to a psychotic need on the part of the parents, particularly the mother. Loving and caring parents only have the amount of children that they can effectively raise socioeconomically, psychologically, and emotionally. They have the amount of children that they can give highly individualized attention to and can spend time with. They have the amount of children that they can provide for beyond the bare rudiments. They have the amount of children that they can provide the highest quality of life for.

      Parents of large families REFUSE to acknowledge this. They believe that if they provide the basic rudiments, if that, for their children, that's fine enough. Children from large families are used to a lower quality of life. To them, subsistent and impoverished living is normal. They maintain that doing without is quite normative when IT ISN'T. Amanda, parents and children in large families live in a world quite different from normal people. Parents of large families couldn't care less that they aren't able to adequately support their children. They also couldn't give too hoots about their children's educational future. They do not believe in fully supporting their children, their only concern is physically bringing them in the world. Parents of large families really DON'T care one iota about their children once they are brought into the world.

    • tkaneohe 2 years ago

      Just because YOU feel like you can't effectively raise more than two children doesn't mean no one else can, and it's completely ridiculous for you to make that generalization about other people.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      The average parent cannot effectively and adequately raise more than 2 children by themselves. There are parents who can raise 3-4 children beautifully by themselves. However, the average parents CANNOT effectively and adequately raise a large/very large family(6 0r more children per household) effectively and adequately by themselves.

      Parents who proclaim that they can effectively and adequately raise 6 or more children by themselves are not being truthful. Parents of such families FORCE their oldest/older children to raise the younger siblings. This is not fair to the oldest/older child in the family. They have to spend their normative childhood and adolescent years raising siblings, missing out on their childhood and adolescent years.

      It is an utter lie that parents can raise 6 or more children effectively and adequately by themselves. Who are THEY fooling. Oldest/older children in such families KNOW better. It is this unsung precious ones who are THE REAL PARENTS in the family, not the actual parents whose only concern is incessantly popping them out without any regard and concern to the already existing children in the family.

    • Patti 2 years ago

      I am watching a rerun of when Josie had a seizure while mom was in El Salvador. WHAT ?was she doing leaving Josie during those un stable times. As a mom I would never even consider it.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Patti, parents of large families do not care about their children only about physically giving birth to them. Parents of large families push them out but relegate the caring of the chilldren to the oldest/older ones. Parents of large families are the most abusive parents; they know that they cannot raise a large brood of chilidren by themselves but they nevertheless keep breeding children ad infinitum.

    • Stubbs 2 years ago

      After the Duggars show has been over awhile I would love to have a book written by the film crew about what happened behind the scenes. Although I am sure they probably can't.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Stubbs, ME TOO. That is one "Tell All" book I would definitely buy.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      ME THREE, would love to read the total dysfunction of that family including the abuse/enslavement of the older girls, the sexual misconduct of the oldest boy etc. The sooner the tell all book is published, THE BETTER! BRING IT ON!

    • Angel 2 years ago

      They are a happy family that supports itself! They dont leech off the govenrment! and OH! By the way!! that nice big 6,000sq/ft house that they are living in now.... yeah that was paid for BEFORE the series was picked up, AND they did about 75% of the work THEMSELVES!! They work together as a team, love the Lord our God! as the Bible says Judge not lest thee be Judged!! (how perfect are you and your life??)

    • J. Eteme 2 years ago

      I do not think the Dugger's are responsible parents. I think that insisting the older girls be primary caregivers is wrong. I do not know them personally but from where I am standing as a 48 year old women with two lovely children of my own, I can't imagine having the energy to birth another baby at this time in my life. Has anyone wondered if there might be any sexual abuse going on in this family? How about incest? I am not saying that is going on but I do wonder with such little parental supervision and all.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @ J. Eteme, I WONDER TOO. Of course the Duggars are irresponsible parents. Let us say that the word irresponsible is a severe understatement. They are selfish and narcissistic to the highest degree. All THEY care about is just procreating and having a LARGE family without thinking of the ramifications of their actions on the existing children. Not only the Duggars dear but the AVERAGE/TYPICAL parent of large families (6 and more children per household) think that way also. Parents of large families just think of having children ad infinitum w/o being concerned about the physical, emotional, and specifically, socioeconomic ramifications this action has upon their children. In large families, oldest children are THE REAL parents, not the actual parents. Oldest children in large families RAISE/PARENT their younger siblings, having NO normative childhood nor adolescence. Oldest children are waylaided if not pressed into the service of parents and younger siblings. Middle children in large families are.......well, neglected and oftentimes left to THEIR OWN devices. Youngest children in large families receive the most parental care and attention.

      Also, children in large families oftentimes gravitate towards juvenile activity such as gangs and other forms of juvenile delinquency because they have little or no parental supervision. Children from large families are socioeconomically bereft, their parents have little monies for the necessities, let alone the luxuries. They oftentimes have a psychology of struggle and want because they grow up with so little. Large families also are more likely to depend upon outside charities and/or governmental aid to keep them afloat socioeconomically. Large families can be described as pathological to a degree. Of course, there is some type of abuse in large families as parents are ill-equipped to care for and to give the prerequisite attention to a large number of children. The psychology and culture of the large family is so divergently different from the psychology and culture of the small family. Children in large families are deprived physically, emotionally, psychologically, and especially socioeconomically. Children in large families see poverty and struggle as a normative way of living and see anything beyond poverty as extravagance. J. Eteme, thank you so much for stopping by and adding your intelligent analysis to the discussion.

    • mellowde 2 years ago

      Now the Duggers seem to be using the mating of their daughters to continue to produce programs for tv. The 'courting' is so dysfunctional as to be sickening. What couple needs a parent along on each date? Where's the trust? And no 'frontal' hugging. The sperm may get through the clothing and impregnate one of the daughters before they can get the most out of the 'courting' for tv purposes.

    • mellowde 2 years ago

      And Angel, the good book also says "ye shall know a man by his deeds". Taking verses out of context is one sure-foot way to hell. The Lord says not to add to or take away from the word. It is a gift from above to be able to 'discern'. And it says that one of the purposes for fellowship is to keep each other accountable. I'd go back and reread that section again and compare it to the Greek manuscripts for better understanding. 'Judgement' is what The Lord does on 'judgement day' when determining our fate. No one on here is determining anyone's fate, nor do they have the power to do so.

    • tired of losers 2 years ago

      So I don't usually post to these sites but really what the duggars do in their house is theirs to do. They are raising their children on the principle of family working together. Which you may think is wrong its your opinion but the typical american kid worship style of raising kids is so much better now. I can tell by all the adored psychotic kids who walk into schools and movie theaters and college campuses and blow everyone in sight away. Maybe if they had learned that the world didn't revolve around them they wouldn't be so psychotic. I would rather a woman have 19 kids than to slaughter millions in a a back office Godless clinic or drug addicted crackheads having babies that suffer endlessly when they are born drug addicted. so please you may not like their parenting style but their children are productive citizens of society unlike the millions of "normal" raised american kids who are murdering, aborting, and welfaring which really does impact the rest of us. Thanks and have a great day!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Dear Tired of Losers:

      Not sure who the "losers" are that you refer to, but in any event, you seemed to have missed the point. Naturally no one can blame what the Duggars do in their own home, on their private time. However, the Duggars lose the right to claim what they do in their own home is their business when they become public. The TV and the marketing of their lifestyle, the advertisers who pay for the show ALL make them public and fair game for criticism.

      I don't know how you managed to spin the abortion debate into this topic--which is legal and NOT done in a "back office" thankfully, but it has NOTHING to do with the topic at hand which is the Duggars spitting out children willy nilly without any regard for those children's emotional well being or their development into healthy, well rounded adults. That to me is a bigger murder and slaughter than aborting an embryo that a woman who makes a heartfelt decision of what is the best choice for her.

      FREE MERIAM---http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/ma...

    • susan33967 2 years ago

      The way the show is going,we won't hear anything about the younger children 14 and younger,until they do something to stand out.

      Josh and Anna seem to be on their way to procreating at the same speed.

      This family is nothing more than servants.The parents spend money on trips to other countries so they look like they are helping people.And to agree to take Jill to Nepal at the drop of a hat to meet Derrick?(who by the way seems like an awesome guy) Wow. My family would have cracked up with laughter.I see they have skype. So I'm sure since the parents don't pay attention,these kids are scanning the internet.I agree with the majority of you here.So it has all been said.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Agree w/Askme, any parent who has a large family(6 0r more children per household) do not spend quality time w/their children. In large families, children tend to raise themselves and have unmet needs. Children in large families have a poor sense of self.

      Despite the illogical, asinine, and straw man "commentary" of tired of losers, children of large families are the delinquents, gang members, and bullies who harass other children because they did not have a conducive environment growing up. Children from small families, for the most part, are well-behaved, respectful, and high achievers.

      Compare the formative years of Chelsea Clinton(small family) to Mark Wahlberg(large family). Chelsea was a well-trained, well-behaved high achiever while Mark was a thug who indulged in all sorts of delinquent activity. It is children from large families who gravitate to deleterious activities because of lack of parental attention. They did not receive the proper attention so they participate in undesirable activities in order to the attention they did not receive. For the most part, children in small families DON'T do that.

      Children in large families are unsupervised. They, for the most part, raise themselves and other siblings. One can say that children from large families do not receive the proper parental training. Older children in large families are either neglected or pressed into service, caring for younger siblings. Oldest children in large families are akin to forced laborers in concentration camps and/or the enslaved in the Antebellum South; no reprieve nor individual lives at all.

      The large family has an inverse culture and psychology. UP is DOWN and DOWN is UP. Poverty and struggle are seen as good and normative. Children assume adult role as parents and working to pay their way because their tunnel vision parents procreate like lower lifeforms, being unconcerned about the ramifications of their acts upon the existing children. Children having unmet needs, falling for the first person who shows them any type of affection. Daughters from large families have a higher risk of becoming teen mothers because they did not receive the prerequisite parental love and attention. Examples are two maternal aunts, some maternal cousins, and many classmates from large families.

      To reiterate if children do not get positive attention, they will get NEGATIVE attention. Many children of large families do things to get negative attention such as being juvenile delinquents, thugs, and teen mothers. They also tend to be bullies, taking out their frustation upon society as a result of their environment. How many children were shaken down and had their items stolen by children from large families who did not have the prerequisite things growing up.

      Children from large families are at a SEVERE DISADVANTAGE physically, emotionally, psychologically, and socioeconomically. They tend to have poorer health and nutrition, lack of medical/ health care, and living in utter impoverishment, penury, or near it. Any parent who has a large family must be amiss.

      Intelligent and educated parents have children that they can take care of, educate, and provide things beyond the rudiments. They also have the amount of children that they can provide individualized time and attention to. It is only the uneducated who have more children than they can adequate take care of physically, emotionally, psychologically, and socioeconomically.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Askme, I want to add that children from large families DO act out, Mark Wahlberg admitted to indulging in deleterious activities as a youth. Many criminals come from large families e.g. John Gotti, who came from a very large family of 11 children. He went into a life of crime as a means of survival. However, tired of losers failed to mention that, instead displacing his/her venom towards small families. Hmm, perhaps tired of losers came from a large family and is rationalizing the large family. Typical large family "logic" here.

      The category of children that tired of losers mentioned is a small minority of children from small families. The argument of tired of losers is inane to say the very least. Most children from small families won't think of harming others because they receive parental attention. They are busy with school, extracurricular, and cultural activities.

      It is the children from large families who gravitate towards criminal, especially the more dangerous variety, because of the lack of parent attention of the minuses of other environmental variables. Children from large families also gravitate towards more dangerous, deleterious, and delinquent activities because they have LITTLE/NO parental supervision, do not indulge in extracurricular activities, and have hardly any monies to indulge in educational/cultural activities. So they are left to roam, getting into God knows what!

    • NiaLee profile image

      NiaLee 2 years ago from BIG APPLE

      I understand the Duggars are extreme, I understand a lot of big families end up with a lot of problems, especially because of poverty and lack of time, but to say that they are all the bad things and people????

      Bernard Madoff don't seem to have siblings, he ruined thousands of people's lives and companies on the face of earth and the after shock of his actions is still here today.

      I agree with the fact that children need time and space, they need love, care and attention, they need quality time with their parents, but all this about big families is hurtful now... please...

      I am from a big family, I have suffered as a child and now as an adult I tell you, the prejudice has been worst than the rest. My parents loved us and did the best with what they knew... ideologies, emotions and ignorance play a big role, but the money is a big factor in many human failures.

      True, humans need to be educated about the different needs their children will have to make better choices and contraception, education, planning help and lot.

    • linda 2 years ago

      The older girls are pursuing careers. One is becoming a doula and one a midwife practitioner. Hrad it ever occurred to you they might not want a career? I did, my sister didnt. My sister had kids, i chose nit to. Why is either thing wrong? Why do you care abd what biz is it if yours? I'd take the Duggars anyday over the trashy Kardashians!

    • NiaLee profile image

      NiaLee 2 years ago from BIG APPLE

      I do agree with you Linda. The thing is today we judge people too much. Nobody is perfect, everybody has a right to their choice and I personally had issues due to money, not to love from home. I love my brothers and sisters so much, I will give my life for them, idem for my parents. we should be free to be happy and no choice is perfect.

    • spectator 2 years ago

      right on Linda and Nialee......my whole point was judging people some people have a issue with that severely as if they have psychological issues about what happen to them or in there families and they are believing they're making some point on large families. ....I don't see not one thing wrong about the Duggars family. ...whatever they're doing they're doing it well people are just what I call(hatting on them).....take care Linda and Nialee.....

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      You three commenters just DON'T get it at all, DON'T you! Mothers who have large families(6 or more children) are acting unintelligently and mindlessly. There must be a severe, psychological void in their lives for them to have more children than they can possibly care for financially, emotionally, and psychologically.

      Mothers who have large families oftentimes DON'T have outside interests nor hobbies. Having a lot of children is a substitute for the aforementioned. If they initially had an outside job, hobbies, and activities, they would not have a need to keep incessantly breeding ad infinitum. Better yet, they have sublimate that baby hunger into helping others. Volunteer at a homeless shelter, visit a nursing home thrice a read and help the elderly, read to children in a hospital or school, help a teacher, there are so many things to do. Participate in more constructive and conducive activities. Having a lot of children is not good for the body.

      Large families were fine in premodern, more agrarian times when children were needed to work the land. However, with more urbanization, large families became totally unnecessary in its premise. One can say that large families was becoming detrimental, especially to the physical, mental, emotional, and psychic health of the mother. Also, people had large families because birth control was not as sophisticated as it is currently.

      Parents who unconscionably elect to have large families are subjecting their children to impoverishment at best. Children from large families must do without, even the basic necessities. They often go hungry as there is not enough food to go around. They also consume inferior quality foods such as canned and powdered foods as better quality foods are expensive and beyond the purview of the average large family. There is no money for cultural and educational activities and pursuits. There is no money for medical/health care. The average large family depends upon OUTSIDE charities and help to stay socioeconomically afloat.

      There is a greater incidence of socioeconomic poverty in large/very large families than it is in small families as monies are stretched to the limit, even for necessities. Anything beyond necessities are out of the question. Children from large families also wear castoff clothings from either charities or second hand stores. If it weren't for schools, children in large families would not receive food nor medical care. They often have to be hungry as there is not enough food to go around. It is often the oldest/older children who go to bed hungry. Children of large families oftentimes have to work from childhood to purchase monies for school supplies and things that normal children have.

      Oldest/older children in large/very large families have to forego their education to assist supporting their families, thus continuing the poverty cycle. If anyone continues their education in large families, it is the younger or youngest children/child. They have it the easiest while the oldest have it the hardest. Yes, it is unthinking, selfish, even abusive for parents to have large families. In fact, one must be mentally ill to want and have a large family. I used the Duggars mainly as the prototype of the inverse logic and inverse psychology of the large family.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Correction: have sublimated, not have sublimate and thrice a week, not thrice a read. Was half awake when typing response.

    • spectator 2 years ago

      It's amazing to hear you become so offensive over our options. I thought we were entitled to our own opinions and to express,we all are adults here we can agree to disagree,not saying that large families don't have more issues but you said some things that is so evil regarding only large families,evidently I notice when someone post thier comment(s) that has a different point of view you blow up.....you talk about God on the other hand one of his commandments was "thy shall not judge"and that's exactly what your doing. .....I mean you are taking the Duggars family so personal as if your one of their family members or their close friend. .....what have they done to you? Are they asking you for anything or telling you what goes on in thier household/ life?I mean we all hear how much large families are so much a disgrace to you,it's too bad... this is life....we have more things going on in America than to be looking down on large families. ...I'm sure you wouldn't like people judging you,neither would I but it doesn't matter in the end....I realize you live under one law and that man's law regarding all these rules man has made....learn about following God's law you'll be a much happier person with a different outlook on life and in general. .....I sure hope you are not a hatred person with issues yourself that your taking out on every one because of your past....with peace, love and respect learn to positively love and teach instead of judging so much. ......

    • mellowde 2 years ago

      Lobbing darts at each other over various aspects of your views and the opposition to them is not the theme of this blog.

      Fact of the matter is the parents have procreated to the extent that they began to miscarriage or worse in order to fill whatever void they have, meanwhile the older children were tasked with raising the younger children already born and alive. And in that sense the parents by definition are neglectful at best. It doesn't matter if they occasionally show signs of caring for their children or that they have a large house with abundance of food, transportation devices/buses or take trips. The tv revenue is partially responsible for their seeming affluence. Absent that and you have a very bad role model in this couple and their way of doing things. And they are splayed across tv for years now promoting that lifestyle. It is perilous for most who attempt this behavior, many ending up on welfare and living in subsidized housing and rocking out of control with the law.

      I don't want to put too fine a point on this but using the older daughter's courtships for story line on recent shows is more abuse of their children who, incidentally have their own lives with feelings and desire for privacy. Make no mistake the daughters know the only way out is to marry themselves off on tv to gain some modicum of freedom for themselves from this household full of too many people with tv cameras in their face on way too many occasions.

      It becomes a mute point to detail the merits of large family over small family, or how well-behaved they seem to be when seen on the tube. Lacking privacy to mature due to being used as pawns in a tv series has in many ways already taken it's toll. I heard the way one of the older boys talked down to one of the beau's in a recent show. Putting him to a test as if he was the judge of who his sister should marry. And basically treating this outsider the same way he's been treated throughout his own life. Children raising children is a particularly damaging way to create dysfunction in an individual.

      I heard my wife complain about her experiences being raised by an older teen sister and brother while her mother and father were absent doing their thing. Emotional abuse was the theme as the older siblings lacked the maturity themselves to properly relate to the emotional needs of their younger sister and two other even younger brother and sister. Their parents came from large families themselves and considered this situation to be normal.

      Did Jim Bob go through the same scrutiny as his daughter's beau's are going through when he was 'courting' Michelle (or whatever his wife's name is)? I think not. It's all an act. Not a way of life. Only a way to promote ratings for the tv show.

      That's why I know that the Duggars are extremely dysfunctional as a 'family'. They are not a family but rather a cult with Jim Bob as the wicked leader who's every mood must be considered by the children. They dare not be disobedient or suffer further emotional neglect by the parents. All competing for whatever positive moment they can receive from their parents. Psychologically, these poor children are scarred. What normal children put on a dinner theater to 'please' their parents? But these children will do whatever they can to get a little praise for themselves. And I got to tell you the beau's performance, singing praises to Jim Bob boy and Michelle was sickening. Do you think they'd have done that if this wasn't a pure cult?

      Say what you will but this 'family' is not a good place to grow-up.

    • spectator 2 years ago

      Mellowde. ..... I'm not sure why you responded to my comment that had nothing to do with you or nobody in this" blog".....l was personally talking to gmwilliams about judging people in general regardless the situation right or wrong. ....gmwilliams can hold his or her own comment I made with respect back to me and what I was saying....FYI no one is lobbying darts.....we all have our opinions like it or not and that is What this blog is about incase you forgot or didn't know...... it should not be for judging, stereo typing or criticising each other we are all imperfect and as I stated earlier we can agree to disagree. .......

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      THANK YOU and a MULTILLION APPLAUSES for your logic. See the Duggars are merely microcosms of large family life. I used the Duggars as a prototype of typical and average large families. Average parents of large families have this psychology and raise their children in ways that range from neglect at best. In large families, children do not have the normal family life and closeness to their parents that children from small families have. In large families, it is sibling-sibling. People from large families cannot recall fund memories of their parents, how sad. You have succinct in your analysis. Many people from large families from Art Carney to Mark Wahlberg reported being neglected by their parents. This explains why children from large families are more likely to indulge and gravitate towards delinquent actiivities. They also have to raise and fend for themselves from early childhood. Life in a large family is analogous to being in a mind field. Children from large families have to carefully navigate their environment, the strong survive and the weak get eaten ALIVE, fall through the cracks, and become extinct. With the environment that children from large families grow up in, no wonder that they are rough around the edges, hardscrabbled, and cynical about life in general!

      As I have stated in many of my hubs regarding large family "life", parents are parents in name only. They just birth the children, no giving two ******* about their physical, emotional, mental, psychological, and financial being. Their attitude is screw it, if the children do well, good, and if they don't, well tough! Parents of large families have selflish needs. It is what THEY want- THEY want a large family even though they KNOW that they are unable to support a large number of children and to raise them properly.

      People from large families are damaged. They have a view, culture, and psychology that is extremely askewed and is different from normal families. In large families, the children are adults while the parents are narcissistic children. In large families, children must work to semi-support themselves and help their families because their parents were too stupid to use family planning regarding their children. Children from large families do not have a normal childhood nor adolescence. Of course, this makes them hard early in life. They also do not have nutritious food, proper medical/health care, and other normal amenities. I have stated time and time again that most large families are dependent upon outside aid either through charities, relatives, and the government to keep them socioeconomically afloat. Yes, large families are disadvantaged. Large families are more likely to be impoverished to poor with its aftereffects on the children. If it were not for school programs, most children in large families(6 chilldren and more per household) would not have the proper breakfast/lunch and health care. It is amazing what poor health the average child in a large family is. Yet their parents don't care one iota-all they care about is just reproducing at will.

      Also, everyone knows that in large famililes, oldest siblings RAISE/PARENT their younger siblings. Many times the oldest/older siblings resent the younger siblings which result in abuse. Remember the case where a 13 year old was left with 5 siblings to look after and she snapped killing the youngest sibling. Oldest/older siblings in large families are compelled to raise their siblings thus missing out on their childhood and adolescence, making them highly bitter and jealous of younger siblings. Yes, children in large families live as the song in Annie, a hard knock life that one would not wish upon their worst enemy. The 9th circle of Hell is better than life in a large family. Thank you for stopping by and adding to the discussion. You are ALWAYS WELCOME.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Large families are WRONG. Children are thrust into poverty, doing without even the basic necessities. They have to endure less than human conditions. Oldest/older children PARENT younger siblings. Children having to forego their education to support the family because the parents did not have the innate intelligence to limit the number of children. Your logic if it can be called that is totally implausible. No intelligent and educated person is going to have more children than they can support, love, and educate. Any parent who has a large family is unthinking, cruel, and selfish. THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY ON THE MATTER. I grew up around people from large families and they informed me how stupid their parents were and how they WEREN'T going to be at all like them!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Just IGNORE spectator. Cannot explain logic to some people. IGNORE him/her.

    • Deborah 2 years ago

      Ive left this comment on other pages several times over the years. My point is: What is going to happen to the girls after they are married with no real education and parents are too old to care for them? They will be left as housewives with no real way to support themselves if they divorce or in a abusive relationship and left with 10 kids themselves? What will happen if The parents have a 20th child that is special needs? They dont care of the children they have already...So who will pay for the care of these children when the parents are too old or gone? The taxpayer of course! But its a problem that is as old as god himself and I am sure the Duggers pray about this and put it in gods hands...However god doesnt pay welfare. What will happen to these socially retarded girls after the show is over..Well I can take a good guess! All of the girls will need life long therapy..blaming their parents for exploiting them and not having a normal childhood...Im guessing drugs, and rebellion is in the near future..Have to mention Dana Plato, Todd bridges, Gary Coleman, Donny Bonaducci, River Phenoix, Brittany Spears, list goes on and on and on....They all blamed their parents after the party was over! They all had the same question for their parents (Why did you let this happen to me?)

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Deborah, you are correct in your analysis and commentary. However, it is not only the Duggars but the average parent of large/very large families(6 or children per household). The ONLY thing on these parents' minds and consciousness is having a LARGE/VERY LARGE FAMILY. That is what THEY want and will do regardless of their already existing children are neglected. That is what THEY want and will do even if the family is impoverished and have to depend upon donations from outside charities, relatives, and the GOVERNMENT. That is what THEY want and will do even if the children go to bed hungry, have no medical/health care, have no cultural/educational enrichment, and have to wear castoffs. You see Deborah , parents of large/very large families do not have two damns about their children whatsoever.

      The Duggars are only a prototype of many large families. They endlessly reproduce, give the children over the oldest/older children to raise(believe, that is commonplace in large/very large families). In large/very large families, daughters are treated as second class citizens and are considered to be inferior/subordinate to males. The world of the large/very large family is vastly different from that of small families. Parents of small families for the most part PLAN for their children and are CONCERNED about their children's physical, emotional, and financial future. I grew up in a very small family and my parents were concerned about my future in every way. So were most parents of the small families I grew up around.

      Not so with the large/very large families I grew up around. Their parents were lacksadaisical regarding their children. They were parents in name only. Their children were often left unsupervised, raising themselves. I have extended relatives from large/very large families and they raised themselves. Children raising themselves is quite common in large/very large families. This explains why children from large/very large families believe that children should learn on their own. Have YOU noticed that parents from large/very large families do not teach their children anything but expect them to learn on their own? People from large/very large families oftentimes make uninvolved, perfunctory, and otherwise horrible parents based upon their early family environment.

      Also, the majority of large/very large families receive SOME outside aid. Let's not kid ourselves. They even admit to receiving aid. There has to be a degree of mental retardation on the parents' part to have more children than they can support, raise, and educate. However, the Duggar children are brainwashed to believe that their lifestyle is normative as many children in large/very large families believe. Even though their circumstances are abysmal, the average person from a large/very large family will state emphatically that they had the "BEST" of childhoods. This is called denial and people from large/very large families are excellent in the art of denial. Deborah, thank you again for stopping by and adding to the discussion.

    • mellowde 2 years ago

      It is just not normal to have your life splayed all over tv and broadcast everywhere. Normal relationship requires some modicum of privacy. Building a relationship, one person to another needs some amount of privacy. This show reminds me of a movie I once watched where this man's life was televised all the time. It was crazy. And so is this.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Duggars have tv show with the sole purpose of making money to "support" their ever growing brood. Their tv show is a sure bet!

    • mellowde 2 years ago

      Heavens forbid Jim Bob boy should have to go out to work. With theme of show tanking it's easier to just use the personal lives of his children for more story line, ie marrying off his daughters. If this guy had to work to support his children he might have stopped poking Michelle a long time ago. Absolutely the worst role model for family on tv.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Totally agree with you there. What idiots Jim Bob and Michelle are. However, there will be imbeciles who see this "family" as role models.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Mellowde, it is not only the Duggars but parents of large/very large families. One has to have some type of psychological disorder to have 6 and more children in this postmodern era. In the more rural and agrarian times, large families were fine as children were needed to work farmlands Also people had large/very large famlies, not willingly, because there was very little contraception available or if there was, it was very primitive.

      But nowadays with advanced contraception, there is no reason to have more than 2 children. Parents who have large/very large families have a different psychology from that of normal parents Parents of large/very large families have a selfish, callous attitude towards having children. It is what they want. Please watch the program Supernanny: The Costello Family on youtube. The Costello family has TEN children and can hardly raise them but the stupid mother wants 2 more The oldest boy is the one raising the younger siblings, having no life of his own.

      Large/very large families are evil. The average large/very large family range from socioeconomically poor to below poverty. Children have to constantly do without the rudiments. They have to work from childhood to purchase the things normal children have. Many have to forego higher education to help work to support their families. My parents, uncles, aunts, assorted extended relatives, and some cousins came from large/very large families. They fit the aforementioned description in many cases. Anyone who advocates and believes in large families have some screws missing. Even those who "love" large families admit how they had to struggle but they are too obtuse to admit the deprivation they suffered. Mellow, small families are better.

      Educated and intelligent people know the perils of large/very large families. It is not good for the mother's body, it taxes the father, oftentimes making him the only breadwinner, and the children suffer most of all. What can't some people see this? Are they that imperceptive and incomprehensibly dense? Studies have been done to authenticate how large families negatively affect families, especially women and children. Yet, there are pundits who still have large/very large families, knowingly place them into dire poverty or worse. What Bizarro World are these people in? There are people with inverse logic who advocate large/very large families knowing that such children will suffer. Children are precious individuals, not packs. Well, as my brilliant father used to say some people are just HARD to learn.

    • Karyn 2 years ago

      I'd like to comment. Off-topic from your current discussion, but I just want to throw out there that Jennifer is the most neglected of the Duggar girls. She is always left out. Even Michelle described her as "serious". I think Jennifer is sweet and is being very neglected. I feel so deeply for her because I can relate. Being the 9th of 13, I was always forgotten because my mom conceived #10 when I was barely 3 months old. All of the attention shifted to the baby. At 26, that still hurts me psychologically. Just my story and view.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Karyn, this is de rigueur in large/very large families of 6 children and more. I am glad that you have told me your story. This is a fact of large/very large family life. However, many in large/very large families have experienced the same thing; however, they chalk it up,even rationalizing it. Parents who have large/very large families are selfish. Yes, I SAID IT. All they are concerned about is how many THEY WANT, not caring at all about the ramifications of having a lot of children upon the existing children they already have.

      The average child in large/very large families must raise and learn to fend for themselves, often from early childhood. Large/very large family life is the law of the jungle-either one sinks or swims. I read a sociology book(forgot the title of book, darn), the author stated that in large/very large families, parents are colder and less nurturing of their children. Typical parents of large/very large families are uninvolved in their children's lives. Children are left helter skelter without much supervision. The parents had MORE children than they can exercise an effective span of control over and can give individualized attention to. Now this means that oldest/older children are consigned to be the parents of younger siblings. Please read the book, LOST CHILDHOODS, THE PLIGHT OF THE PARENTIFIED CHILD by Gregory J. Jurkovic. Professor Jurkovic asserted that parentified children are oftentimes oldest/older daughers of large/very large families.

      Of course Jennifer is neglected. In large/very large families, one child or a few will be NEGLECTED and some will FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS. However, some stupid and myopic idiots doth proclaim that there is so much love in large/very large families. Totally bullcock, children in large/very large families do not receive the prerequisite love and attention from parents, the parents simply DON'T have the emotional and psychological resources to devote to each child which means that such children will suffer in one way or another.

      Madonna who was one of 8 children, asserted that she had to be loud and aggressive in order to get parental attention. Mark Wahlberg, one of 9 children, indicated during interviews that his parents, esp. his mother, was so overwhelmed with the number of children, he had to raise himself. In one episode of THE WALTONS, Mama Walton was going to have yet another child, the next to the youngest was angry, saying why she is pushed aside for the baby. I have written numerous hubs on the detriments of the large/very large family. You have authenticated what I have written. This is not only your story but the story of many people from large/very large families. At least, you and those who admit to this are the truthful ones; the others simply rationalize it, going into attack and denial mode when this subject is brought up. At least you aren't in denial like the majority of people from large/very large families are. What you have stated and from what I have observed in large/very large families from my parents, aunts, uncles, assorted relatives, friends, and associates, the large/very large families is highly pathological and aberrant. I am a strong, even militant advocate for small families(1-2 children). In small families, children receive the prerequiste love and attention. Parents are either on a equal paring or outnumber the child/children. In large/very large families, the children OUTNUMBER the parents and they have no focus of control and they use the oldest/older children as parental reinforcements. In large/very large families, the children LOSE in more ways than one.

    • labs1028 2 years ago

      I have a family in my development. I call her turkey burger. The younger boy is outside watching his 4 younger brothers and sisters. He has no choice. I never see turkey burger outside. The children use the dugger method crying all night as babies so they can depend on themselves. I have never seen so much pain. When the eldest comes over my house he cries to me when he has to leave and go back to being a slave. She thinks just because she spends all day in the kitchen making foods from scratch with no fat she is queen sheebah. I have never seen her play with her kids and if they eat something with fat she makes them walk around the 2 mile development twice with no water. so sad

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Dear labs, the life of children in large/very large families is hell. Forced laborers lead happier lives. My dear, parents in large/very large families are quite callous towards their children. You are right, there is little love and affection in large/very large families in despite of what some delusional and myopic people contend that there is love in large/very large families-pure BS.

      Children in large/very large families are neglected in one way or another. The incidence of child neglect is higher in large/very large families than it is in small families, that is a fact. However, there are many in large/very large families who delusionally do not feel this way because that was normative in the large/very large family. Parents of large/very large families are uninvolved and nurturing towards their children. There are no hugs nor other forms of affection in large/very large families.

      Parents of large/very large families view their children as noisome obligations, as cogs in the family dynamic, and as collections, instead of as individuals. These parents have an infantile, even psychotic need to have a lot of children because it is their fantasitical need. It is want THE PARENTS want, not what benefits the children of the family, remember that Labs.

      You are spot-on in observing that the large/very family is a more brutish familial environment than that of small families. Parents of large/very large families are more harsh and callous in dealing with their children than parents of small families who are more involved and caring. This is why people and children from large/very large families consider people from small families to be spoiled because the latter DOES receive parental time, attention, and love, something that IS MISSING in large/very large families. Parents of large/very large families care about NUMBERS while parents of small families care about CHILDREN.

      Btw, it is normative that in large/very large families, oldest children are consigned to parent younger siblings. The life of the oldest child in such families is analogous to that of a slave, never ever having any reprieve. Parents of large/very large families are very consciousless people; if they weren't, they would have the sense to not have large/very large families!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      labs1028, Turkey burger sounds abusive. Children need a strong sense of being loved and cared for at an early age so they can develop into emotionally secure people later on and "depend on themselves" when their development allows it. So awful. I hope child services gets wind of this turkey soon.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Hope so also.. It is so typical that children from large/very large families grow up in environments that are considered to be abusive by the rest of us. Spcioeconomic impoverishment, struggle, and/or penury; having to do without the basic necessities; going to be hungry as there isn't enouigh food to go around; children RAISING each other and themselves; children WORKING from childhood to get the things that they need and to often help their parents, and children foregoing education in order to work full-time at a young age in order to help supplement income. Also parents of large/very large families tend to implement more harsher discipline, even corporal punishment, in their families. e.g. Jacksons. If such is not abusive, then WHAT is? Of course, turkey burger is abusive but so are the Duggars, and so was Joe Jackson. Besides turkey burger, child services should investigate the Duggars for child abuse and neglect.

    • Karyn 2 years ago from East USA

      Karyn here again. I agree with all of your comments about large families. There were maybe two of my siblings who were truly given enough love by my parents. I only have one child currently, and I am planning to keep it that way. Living in a big fundamentalist family is hard. The only emotion that is "acceptable" in public is happiness. If you are not happy in public, you can expect a spanking at home. Corporal punishment was not only used, but encouraged. Since my father was only a cashier at a bookstore and he did not allow my mother to work, we were worried if there would be enough food on the table some nights. My parents had 13 kids in (give or take) 19 years. That had major health effects on my mom and once she found out that she couldn't have any more kids, my father was infuriated and prayed that God would forgive my mom for her sins. Like the Duggars, we could not show our shoulders or knees, go to the beach, or have mainstream dating relationships. What saddens me even more is that only me and 2 other siblings had the courage at 18 to move out and break away from the cult. The rest of my siblings are still living their "Quiverfull" lives and "serving the Lord" with their children. There is more to my story that I'll probably post a Hub about.

      To sum it up, the Duggar children may seem all cheerful on camera, but you never know what happens behind closed doors. I truly hope at least some of these children come to their senses and realize that this is just an abnormal, DYSFUNCTIONAL cult.

    • Denise Handlon profile image

      Denise Handlon 2 years ago from North Carolina

      Thanks for directing me to your hub, gm. Wondering where you did your research? It appears that many, many people have opinions about the Duggers-your responses here reflect this controversy.

      So, I am even more curious about their lives and religious following. I've never ever heard of the Qiverfull method before. I'm intrigued to learn more. As for the baby hunger-my ex sister in law was like this. It's crazy.

      Up/U/I and sharing.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I did a lot of reading on the Duggars on the internet via Bing searches. Read many articles on the Quiverfull Movement where mothers were encouraged to leave their family planning up to God. Also read many large family blogs. Then had relatives who were from large families. Heard their stories about how life was in such families. Thank you for stopping by and commenting.

    • LongTimeMother profile image

      LongTimeMother 2 years ago from Australia

      I have never seen the tv show and probably never will, but I feel extremely sorry for the children.

      Mind you, if jeanie mceachern's family had featured in a tv series, I would have tuned into that one. I have no doubt her children would have developed a plethora of useful life skills. :)

    • Sadie 2 years ago

      I loved this article and the comments that provided me almost 2 hours worth of reading! this family interests me, i watch the show on netflix, and I totally see all the points brought up.. kids doing hard outside labor "daddy gave us tons of projects".. and the daughters milled off to husbands that ONLY the dad approved of! effed up if u ask me.. I get wanting to help your community and your world, but only when your family's needs are met! leaving a sick baby home ALONE with a teenager, if I did that, I would get crucified on the 6 o clock news! People hale her a wonderful example of great parenting!! If I could travel (it seems too, that all they do on their show is fly here, drive there, stay here, impose there) constantly and on someone else's dime, and leave my kids in the care of my kids, SIGN ME UP!! unfortunately I only have one child, which I know is enough for me. I want my daughter to be an individual, and have her own hopes and dreams, not to be a mere assembly liner of my baby factory! the poor daughters all "STRIVE" to look alike and get that (absolutely gross hairstyle) and they all have the same expressions, and when asked if they want smaller families, I loved how Michelle gazed around the room at the kids, and watched absolutely NONE of them raise their hands. She knew her "training" was working! you see it plain as day!! even when the dan guy was a "duggar for a day" he even said that the kids are left to their own devices. in that scenario they were swinging from a dead tree, often 40ft in the air, and even he, an outsider, was worried, but Michelle was not to be bothered in the house, and the dad, only came to join in the fun, not regulate it. I agree you should not be OVERLY protective, but safe should be a main concern! stocking your in home grocery store should come secondary. and if you dont like my spelling, or grammer, cram it! i dont care!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Sadie, this is NOT only the Duggars but the average large/very large family. I wrote about the Duggars as a prototype for large/very large families in America. What Michelle does is what the average mother of a large family do to her children.

      Sadie, children in large/very large families are raised military and assembly style. There is LITTLE parental love in large/very large families. Children in such families aren't seen as precious entities but numbers and cogs in the machine. They are taught not to be individuals; they are taught to be nonentities. Children reared in large/very large families are personae non gratae. They are reared to blend in; to be NOTHINGS.

      The large/very large family environment is analogous to a military or institutional environment. Everything is cold and impersonal. Parents do not care about their children after they continuously pop them out. All they care about is HAVING CHILDREN, NOT ACTUALLY NURTURING AND RAISING THEM. Children in large/very large families RAISED themselves and each other. They are also unsupervised. One can aptly describe children from such families as feral, untrained, and unpolished. That is the large/very large family environment.

      Here is a ditty:

      You know that you are in large family when the Depression is every day, not just a period of time.

      You know that you are in a large family when you are the ADULT in the family while your parents are the CHILDREN.

      You know that you are in a large family when you have to wear castoffs and clothes that has been worn before. New clothes? You're kidding, what is NEW CLOTHES.

      You know that you are in a large family when privacy is a foreign word. You are used to living on top of each other and living in the open.

      You know that you are in a large family when you sometimes go hungry so that your siblings can have enough to eat.

      You know that you are in a large family when you have to work from childhood to get the things that normal children have.

      You know that you are in a large family when spam is a meat.

      You know that you are in a large family when you see other children going out and travelling while you simply CAN'T.

      Sadie, the large/very large family is the inverse of normal families. Parents of large/very large families are infantile, they believe that they should have the children they want without considering the ramifications of their actions socioeconomically and psychologically upon the existing children. If their children are impoverished, have no health/medical care, and wearing inferior clothing, it is of no concern. All they want are NUMBERS not people. Parents of large/very large families aren't concerned about their children at all. NEED I SAY MORE.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Sadie, if parents of large/very large families had more constructive outlets and REAL, substantial jobs, they would be too occupied to be profligately and mindlessly reproducing ad infinitum. Parents who have outside interests, friends, hobbies, and a job would not have time and energy to just reproduce on rote. Mothers of large/very large families reproduce ad infinitum because they have a void in their lives which they believe would be only fulfilled by begetting baby after baby. If they had CAREERS/JOBS, FRIENDS, ACTIVITIES, they would have a more constructive outlet for their feelings of void. These mothers really have some type of psychological disorder as no normal and logical person would have a large/very large family in this postmodern age.

    • Michelle Ascani profile image

      Michelle Ascani 2 years ago from Deep in the Heart of Texas

      ah ok. got it. Didn't know you were only posting or responding to comments that hailed your opinion rather than ones that said anything possitive about the Duggar family. Well, this is your article. Dictators welcome.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      There's NOTHING positive about parents who mindlessly reproduce children without considering the ramifications of their act upon the children. There's NOTHING positive about parents who believe in seeing their children as assemblies instead of individuals. There's NOTHING positive about parents who have children raising OTHER children. GET THE PICTURE? GOOD!

    • Common Sense 2 years ago

      These people are helping dumb down the common American thinking they have endless rights. These people are MINDLESS DRONES taught to be baby making machines who don't even have a basic 7th grade education and end up in NO further learning programs or university after they become 18 years old. The girls are taught to be home makers and not contribute to an active social community and the boys are left to their own devices and it SHOWS as proof that they go into meaningless industries that within a generation will be completely obsolete. If you're going to start a small army then you should educate them. When people use the "this is America" mentality to say they should be allowed to do whatever they want with their life...then let me say that the same point can be made to show they are not giving these kids the best chances to have a sustainable life let alone the chance to have a bright and full future with how sheltered they are in so many aspects. Want me to name those aspects...gladly: societal roles are being skewed, the children take care of one another, no parental guidance, ZERO privacy which every developmental adolescent NEEDS, these kids don't have an education that would get them an entry level position, being sheltered from anyone outside their religion or race sets them up for failure because they have ZERO social skills, associating with only their family makes them have a close knit family but how close is too close? When you're not allowed to go places alone then you are enforcing a mentality of unhealthy thinking and lack of exposure to the REAL outside world other than their own bubble makes it a shock when they are exposed. Time will tell for the entire family but overall I think TLC has glorified these baby making machines and middle America are dumb enough to think "aww how cute a happy family" when as Americans we have THE most mental disorders and issues and they can't see that this family is a perfect example of how immune we are to the dysfunction they exhibit. Pumping out kids when you've got 19 already or at least WANTING to pump out kids is a sign of something wrong. That's like having a cage full of puppies that are reliant on you to guide them to being normal dogs and not have issues with each other or people that come around the cage, running out of room and still buying dogs to put into the cage when the ones you have are being deprived of attention. Those dogs are bound to have behavioral issues...these kids are no different. Whatever makes these two irresponsible parents happy is "acceptable" because they've raised their kids to think that and they as a family agree that's right because these kids no NOTHING different other than that. Make sense now of how dysfunctional this situation is? If they have another kid I'm going to call CPS on them myself as a psychology major I see the major potential for disaster...and it's about one kid away from overflowing the insanity barrier. Well it already has passed that by a million miles at child 10 but for f**ks sake you said it best...when is enough REALLY enough? To deprive your older kids from traveling because YOU as a parent decided to have ANOTHER child you don't need or will take care of is fricken insane...making CHILDREN take care of YOUR kids is fricken insane...I'm disappointed in how this is seen as NORMAL. Far from it and should be exposed as much as they've exploited their children for fame and money.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      THANK YOU, the Duggars are INDEED mentally ill, even psychotic. One has to be divorced from reality to have that many children.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Common Sense--you truly are the voice of reason and common sense. You summed it up perfectly.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme and Commonsense, this is not only the Duggars but the typical large/very large family. Parents of large/very large families are like this. All they care about is mindlessly producing children without being concerned of the ramifications of their actions upon the existing children in the family. I have a forum post on the Duggars if you are interested:

      http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/122961

    • Alice Johnston profile image

      Alice Johnston 2 years ago from Montrose, Colorado

      Wow it is mind blowing just how uneducated, hateful, biased, and Hypocritical not only the Author of this story is but also those who commented agreeing are.

      I love how you seem to know without a count that large families are just full of neglect and abuse.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Of course THEY are. Oldest children are sidelined and waylaided or pressed into being the parentified child, raising younger siblings. Parents are often seldom involved in the activities of their children in large families. Children in large families RAISE themselves or each other. I grew up around people from large families, my parents came from large families so I KNOW what I AM TALKING ABOUT! My maternal aunt RAISED her younger siblings as my maternal grandmother kept poppin'em out. Sociological studies show that there is a GREATER incidence of neglect in large families than it is in small families, do the math!

      In large families, the parent-child rolels are reversed. Children in large families have to work from childhood to get the things that normal children have. Parents in large families hardly can provide their children with the bare rudiments, let alone anything else. They have inferior food, health care, and clothing. They live in conditions which makes prison camps seem like palaces. They are also treated in ways which makes prison camps seem like heaven. Children in large families are considered to be numbers instead of individuals. They are just cogs in the family dynamic. Besides growing up around and hearing stories of those from large families, I read extensively sociological books on large families and studied the family as a sociology major in college. These intelligent commenters also KNOW about large family life. So lady be quiet!

    • Common Sense 2 years ago

      Alice Johnston if you think we are hateful then you obviously don't like THE TRUTH, FACTS or COMMON SENSE. I presented NO hateful comments nor a have a reason to be bias in my opinion. EVERYTHING I stated is in reference to ONLY the Duggar family because their actions are promoted to the world in a television show which they get PAID for. So I do KNOW what they show and what they show exhibits not only signs but clear indications of a level of severe dysfunction. I have discussed this within the bounds of class lectures multiple times and in the field of psychiatry and psychology the conclusion is unanimous that this family suffers from MULTIPLE disorders that stem from the parents continuous need to procreate. If you cannot see the RATIONAL in this then you are blinded by YOUR OPINION and don't agree with FACTS. This isn't the OPINION of just one psychology student less than a semester away from becoming a certified psychologist in the state of California but the professional diagnosis from SEVERAL doctors, psychiatrists & psychologists. If you'd like to argue this then you'd have a better chance of arguing your sanity as a mentally unstable patient of that hospital to the board of a mental facility why you'd like to be released. I have nothing further to say other than I have expressed NO hateful comments but only my professional opinion backed by several doctors as well as my personal opinion because we are all allowed to have an opinion. Although we all HAVE an opinion, mine is backed up with the facts and certification to back up mine as being a true diagnosis. Thank you this is all.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Thank you COMMONSENSE for your intelligent reply but you cannot argue with a person in attack mode without presenting any conclusive evidence. Commonsense, you, I and the other INTELLIGENT commenters know that the large family is abusive and abhorrent especially to children. Children in large families are treated akin to those in prison camps. TRUTH BE TOLD.

    • Alice Johnston profile image

      Alice Johnston 2 years ago from Montrose, Colorado

      GM telling someone to be quite and prattling off the same rhetoric offers no help to your cause. like the others I would love to see life is to articles with your proof being more than person all opinion. As I have spent quite a few years dealing with abuse and neglectful situations I can testify this is nothing more. And as the average birth rate per family is two to three children it is impossible mathematically for there to be a higher rate of abuse among those of a higher family. and just for your knowledge I don't watch the show and Have 3 kids a d may as well been a only child given I was the youngest of three brothers the younger being almost 11 years older them myself. given birth rates were higher for people born the 60's back I also had a parent and grand parents and great grand parents who had large families which was partially due to lack of birth control and the reality of high infant and child mortality that are easily prevented now.

    • Alice Johnston profile image

      Alice Johnston 2 years ago from Montrose, Colorado

      GM telling someone to be quite and prattling off the same rhetoric offers no help to your cause. like the others I would love to see life is to articles with your proof being more than person all opinion. As I have spent quite a few years dealing with abuse and neglectful situations I can testify this is nothing more. And as the average birth rate per family is two to three children it is impossible mathematically for there to be a higher rate of abuse among those of a higher family. and just for your knowledge I don't watch the show and Have 3 kids a d may as well been a only child given I was the youngest of three brothers the younger being almost 11 years older them myself. given birth rates were higher for people born the 60's back I also had a parent and grand parents and great grand parents who had large families which was partially due to lack of birth control and the reality of high infant and child mortality that are easily prevented now.

    • Alice Johnston profile image

      Alice Johnston 2 years ago from Montrose, Colorado

      Common sense you are going to college? Great I have spent 7 years fighting in the l

      pits of hell known as child abuse and neglect as a profession. I have seen the real out comes of abuse and neglect. I have seen the damage done by both those who have committed these disgusting acts and those who have falsey accused people of abused based off of discrimination of ethincity, religion and beliefs, and just person hate and vendettas. Til you have gone into so.eones home late at night and removed terrified children from their homes and aced them with star gets you will never know the trauma it in itself can do to a child so I take all accusations seriously.

      the people who said this show is highly edited away from reality are right. The truth is there is very little truth there and they have more than likely edited out all the usual dull everyday tedious parenting tasks that go on in a home.

    • Alice Johnston profile image

      Alice Johnston 2 years ago from Montrose, Colorado

      now as I have said I don't watch the show and have seen less than a dozen since it began. but given they are in the public eye and watched obfessigely by people looking for " red flags" to nail them on there is no doubt they have already been reported to CPS in their area. Every tile there is a report a infestation happens. this mean that CPS has to come to their home unanounced and inspect it top to bottom. Interview the parents and children. If he schooled they have to go to the school PR state and insure proper paper work has been filed. They go through their records to male sure the kids have been receiving the proper amount of hours as by law in their state. Then during interviews with the children they give quizzes and test their knowledge against that of public school kids to insure they are at least near their grade levels. if none of thiseets the require a case is opened and they are first given a chance to correct it. the next the usually them they are given a chance to ace the kids in a alternative schooling method whether private school or public. If this doesn't happen hey are removed. Of we suspect neglect such as a unfit home or lack of parenting we demanding they do parenting classes and therapy and do a series of unanouced visits to ensure this is all being met. However if we feel the child is in immediate danger ( left in bath tubs, have bruises that are consistent with abuse, sex abuse, a huge variety in each of the members stories, domestic violence, or children or parents admitted to abuse) we get a emergency court order and pull the kids. Spanking a child isn't abuse whether you like it or not so long as it is with a hand and there are no marks. Assigning a child chores and requiring them to help out with younger sibling is also not abuse or neglect so long as the children are receiving the care required by the state laws.

      As a person who believes in promoting and accepting diversity across the board I refuse to discriminate against a famines size, ethnicity, or religious and personal beliefs. people are capable of loving and caring for more than a couple children ( average foster home is around 5-6 kids) and abuse happens in the smallest of families at a Mich higher rate. As a professional I hate when people allow their prejudices to decide who is for and isn't. it is a huge waste of time and reaources. Takes away from those truly needing it and upsets homes that are loving and do all that is required. It traatizes children to be removed from their home noatter what and those unfortunate cases where we removed kids due to slander and false reporting those kids bear scars that last as long as those of a child who was brutalized by their parents. all I see here is personal vendettas against a particular family and large families in general. no one can offer up hard evidence to support their claims and that is a dangerous road. One of the judges here has a large family ( 9 kids) and those kids are far abused or neglected. just because you dislike their parenting choices, their religion, their ideals and your personal beliefs you can't hold all people to it. That is the cold hard truth. My life is spent getting to the botttom of the truth and being fair and doing roght by children. I have seen far to many young teenage mother's and parents of small families commit the most henious of crimes. I am yet to come and remove children from a large family and those who are local provide for those children financially and emptionally than the majority of the smaller homes I investigate or have cases in. Til the news headlines that the Duggars have been charged or had a case open by their local CPS or social services I have to say this is unfounded and biased. the comments are ran by emotions of a TV show that again face it is far from reality.

    • Gperkins 2 years ago

      Personally, I think you're all rude, judgmental, inconsiderate people who should probably take a look at their own lives first.

      In all honesty, you all don't have an opinion about their lives, because, once again, it is THEIR lives. Do I want to have 20 kids? No, not really. But I don't judge them for doing it. The kids seem pretty content with their lives right now.

      And as for the kids taking care of kids, I don't think that's right, no. But I'm not going to be an asshole and write an article about how terrible wrong and awful it is.

      Yeah, Michelle Duggar and Jim Duggar are not the greatest parents in the world, but they're better than most and they're probably better than a lot of you all.

    • Mela 2 years ago

      Agree!!! I think they are a wonderful family. I do think it is selfish that they raise their children to not go to college. I have never seen the parents actually kiss any of the children on the cheeks? Do they also not believe in that? Also the side hugs are just extreme. The sexist roles are ridiculous where the girls not taught the importance of an education. I bet if you throw those girls into college they would wait of getting married and having children so young.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Hey G perkins...WE do take a look at our own lives. That is how we arrive at our opinions--BASED ON PERSONAL experience. None of us put our lives out there in the public for examination by the public. That is why we are allowed to question, debate and disagree with the Duggars parenting. Get it? Don't air your family life on national television IF you want to keep it private.

    • annpappas 2 years ago

      I have watched the Duggars for some time now, and as a mom of five I see a very happy and secure family, which now a days is scarce. I homeschool 2 of my girls and they are more secure and happy than they ever were in school. I do not have anything negative to say about all they are doing, no one is complaining about their home life on the Duggars. The kids seem very comfortable with their home lives. The parents parent their children, and there are times when I have to go somewhere and my oldest daughter watches her younger sister, so what, that's called being a family, you help one another, you care about one another, you respect one another. In this world families like this are a dime a dozen, you just don't see too many of them, but when you do you say GOD Bless, not make judgement. You should be happy they are happy and not swimming through half the problems so called normal families swim through. I love my children and would not trade anything for the short time we have together before they go out on their own. I hope GOD continues to bless the Duggars. They are an inspirations to all families that chose to do what others opt out on, being true to your family and not what people think you should do..

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      my children--4 of them-attended public schools made up of students from multi-cultural, religious and varying parents, i.e single parents, gay parents, inter-racial. From that my kids learned to accept people. Friends come in all shapes and sizes. The Duggars are mono-everyone is alike and of the same color, religion and opinions. Much like home school children. I am happy my kids have friends from different cultures and beliefs. They are avid travelers and lovers of new and different things. SADLY the Duggar kids learn only to marry young and start reproducing as many as your womb will take!

    • Diana 2 years ago

      I find this blog highly suspect and lop sided. The girls were never forbidden from traveling to care for the younger ones. Wen in fact the girls went on many excursions leaving the dad to care for the younger ones while Michelle was in the NICU caring for Josie. perhaps some should consider that the eldest daughter Jana did go on to higher education and has not adopted this marry young and be fruitful frame of thought. The only one who does embrace this seems to be eldest son Joshua whose wife Anna seems to love children. Her parents also Christians who have a prison ministry had 9 children and some women truly are designed to be moms or this world would not be so populated. It is true their diet is horrendous by current standards, I would be dead from a heart attack if I ate like they ate. I do not believe the elder girls are subject to subservience, they are all well rounded with a variety of interests, many have higher IQ's and more common sense than young women who are one of two or three children. They could financially afford to build their home, they purchased it themselves along with many commercial properties, This was on the land of one of those properties. The father wanted his son to learns skills in the building of this home project. The reason for the TLC payment was that the family could not finish it fast enough for the TLC series, so this was self serving for TLC. The kids learned many useful skills. many families they meet and show also have very large families, one being their close friends the Bates ( 18 kids), who have a very well rounded family. Another family has 11 children, all adopted and all children with disabilities, these children are thriving. Michelle "baby hunger" seems far fetched to me. After they lost #20 due to a still birth, I believe they have accepted that this season of her life is over. Having sex without birth control is not illegal nor immoral. Do I question some of their parenting style? Sure I do, however, none of these kids has been arrested. They are all responsible and travel the world with a maturity I would not acknowledge in a 40 year old. Yes, many times they travel in pairs, would you want to be in a country of potential danger or in which you did not know the language all alone? A Korean TV company came and filmed them for a week and they did it because Korean births have declined, and they wanted the people to see this successful family. The people who do the filming and sound have been with them since the get go, they bring their kids to join in on excursions. Would I want to grow up like this? No, not if I knew what life was like in the real world. This is their world, this is what they know and love. one daughter recently married and is blooming where she is planted, she and her husband live on their own in another state. Yes, one day they will run out of older kids to care for younger ones, however the younger ones are growing and thriving. Due to the sheer number they had a buddy system, not and enslavement, please get your facts straight. At some point Mom and Dad will be to old or too ill to care for themselves, would you ant to live out your golden years with no one to look after you? No, kids are not put her to be caregivers, Love is what makes them caregivers. They are still caring for Jim Bob's mom who is quite strong, active and healthy. I do not see her complaining or bailing. Sure they are busy and yes, they are very enterprising. I admire people who take every opportunity to live a comfortable life. Michelle's sisters and brother are not part of this movement. They have very different lifestyles. Jim Bob has one sister who has a different lifestyle, she had one child, a daughter who as been taken under their wing, she does not adopt their lifestyle, she is on her own pursuing music in Nashville. I am sure there are many negatives. However, I see so many positives. Many of their beliefs resemble those of Orthodox Jews and I dare anyone to argue with that way of living. I truly believe this blog lacked a lot of balance. And some skewed points of view. I straddle both sides of the fence, as a professional, a mom and a Jew. That is all I will add, I just though the blog was very off point.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      AliceJohnston@ It is a stretch to say no children are ever removed from large families. I see stories quite often in which 5 +kids have removed from horrid conditions. Maybe the teen mom is a good parent, but as you say assumptions cause people to think otherwise. The assumptions, vendettas, and false reporting you speak of cause good parents to lose their 2.5 kids. Given most large families are religious, abuse can go undetected. The stories on reoveringgrace.org tell stories of those from larger families who were sexually and emotionally abused and no one ever guessed..The older daughters do more than just help.

      Diana@ Saying they have higher IQs than women is inane and sexist. You need to dig deeper into their beliefs. You do no know how these kids really feel since a camera is in their face all the time. The Duggars look innocent on TV, but they are trying to make us a country Korea in which females have no rights. None of them have pursued higher education.

    • GG 2 years ago

      You all need to not concern yourself in someone else's business, they have done nothing to you to make you bash and criticize them like this. And the fact that you people take every injury or small detail that you see wrong, and jump to the worst possible case scenario is sick. As humans we ALL get hurt at times! We can't help that! Can you honestly say that you were a perfect child and never got hurt? Stop criticising every decision that this family makes, and MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS. And please do not ignore the fact that they are on television for gosh sakes! If there was abuse going on, Child Services would jump on that. But they haven't.

    • Mindy A. 2 years ago

      I don't know how I stumbled into this thread, but it's a rude awakening. What a bunch of fanatical, judgemental lunatics we have in this country. And keeping a blog to vent their hatred....gmwilliams and askme and your mutual admiration society....you can't be real . I don't give a hoot about the Duggers, but this is extreme. Live and let live.

    • wendy p 2 years ago

      denying all the negatives about producing too many kids doesn't make the reality less true.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Mindy A

      We appreciate your viewpoint. Sorry you stumbled/fell on this blog. I can assure you I am real. I live in Southern CA, currently working a long term job assignment in Washington. I have 4 children, 2 I gave birth to and 2 came with my second marriage.

      I have never met GW but I admire her. This blog is more about large families and how children get lost in the shuffle of parents over taxed with paying attention to the younger ones or using older children as unpaid servants.

      Based on my mother's experience being the oldest in a large family, I know the emotional issues children go through when they are denied the opportunity to have parents who are fully investing their time in their child, allowing their child to grow into mature adults and being allowed to have a childhood.

      I am not a lunatic nor fanatical. You seem to miss the point of this entire hub. It is personal opinion. As far as I know, we are still allowed to voice our opinions especially about fanatics like the Duggars who are on public TV displaying their life. I've said it before-Say it again, you give up the right to NOT be criticized when you put your family in the public eye FOR PROFIT, apparently Mindy A you missed that fact. Duggars are selling their lifestyle and the privacy of their children for $$$. Get over your-self righteous condemnation of OUR RIGHT to express our opinion!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, you are so correct. Children from large-very large families aren't normal like regular children. In large-very large families, it seems that the roles of parent-child are reversed. Parents are the narcissistic brats, only consider their selfish,primal need to endlessly reproduce while the children must assume the more mature role in the family. Parents of large-very large families simply don't give a rat's damn about their children, it is the parents' view that the children raise and support themselves. I have written hubs about this exact large-very large family scenario. I am TOTALLY AGAINST large-very large families as you well know. Any parent who willingly has a large-very large family is abusive pure and simple.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, one of the Duggar's daughters is already pregnant and also plans to have a very supersized family. Yes, the Duggar children are brainwashed into the large family psychosis so to speak. I also would like to add that parents have large-very large families because of fear. Large-very large families are types of emotional/psychological incest if you ask me. Have you noticed that children from large-very large families DON'T have associates/friends and that their relationships are SOLELY with family? Also, children from large-very large families have INFERIOR social skills to children from small families because the former do not feel the need to socialize outside the family circle whereas children from snall families reach out to others and even include them in their inner circle. Yes, people from large-very large families tend to be exclusive as far as others go. People from large-very large families tend not to trust outsiders and have little to no friends whereas people from small families are friendlier towards outsiders and have more friends and better relationships with people overall.

    • Cindy 2 years ago

      I have noticed that several of the commenters have obviously not watched the show. The kids all switch up household duties, which are cooking and cleaning. Jim Bob even taught the girls how to change oil and tires. Guess what, we live in a society that we can chose what, where and when we want to do something. It's our right. Don't you love living in a society like that. The Duggars get to chose too. While I personally don't want that many children, that doesn't mean they don't. They are free to do what ever they wish or believe. We all also have freedom of religion too. Get over it, find something else to complain about. Them and their children are not hurting, taking away or destroying anything of yours, so butt out! Please stop the meaness. From what I can tell, all their children seem to be happy and healthy and that's a lot better than a lot of kids in this world. Please pay attention to your own family and worry about them and make sure your own is taken care of and leave their business to them and take care of your own.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Cindy,

      You missed the point again. It is no longer "their business" when they make a public display of their lifestyle on television. If you want something to be your business, then keep it private. Once you open the door and allow the public into your business, it ceases to be private and open for discussion.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Askme, it is so SAD that so many people support and actually feel sorry for such an insanely pathological family. Any parent who elects to have a large family knowing the detriments socioeconomically, emotionally, and psychologically for the children need a good psychiatrist as he/she has deep issues and a deeper void in his/her life. It is childish narcissism to want to have a large family-children are not collections but individuals in need of individualized parental attention and time. Parents who have large families are selfish, callous, and immature. If they have the "need" for children, why don't they volunteer their time tutoring disadvantaged children, or spend time with homeless and runaway children. That would be more constructive than to endless breed children and bring them into an impoverished environment. That would be the INTELLIGENT thing to do but parents who have large families aren't that intelligent.

    • Anne Magnolia 2 years ago

      Jim Bob and Michelle will continue to brainwash their children until Michelle is s not longer able to have yet another baby. Hopefully one or more of their children will smell the coffee and realize there's a whole wonderful world waiting for them and their children. Minus long skirts no frontal hugging, no sweet kisses prior to the marital bed, and parents who dominate their lives and probably have a say in what's acceptable behind closed doors. Get a life kids - and find your own way not that of your parents.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @ Anne Magnolia, Hopefully that would be the case! Probably ONE will see the light but that is not likely. Children from large-very large families tend to repeat the familial patterns of their parents. It is not unusual for children from large-very large families to marry in their teens and twenties and start having families thereafter. That is part of the large-very large family scenario.

      It is typical for children of large-very large families to marry just to get out their constricted family situation. That is very par for the course. It is also quite common for children from large-very large families to start their families in their twenties as their parents did. Children from large-very large families do not go through the developmental and normative explorative patterns that normal children do.

      I have read one of the Duggar daughters is ALREADY pregnant after EIGHT months of marriage. No getting to know each other as a couple first. This daughter was interviewed by a magazine; she indicated that she "wanted" a supersized family like her parents. Another daughter is engaged and has moved into the Duggar compound but no shenigans until wedded. I hear the theme song from the Addams Family as I am typing this; however, the fictional Addams' family is infinitely far more functional than this "family". Thank you for stopping by and adding to the discussion! My dear, this is not only the Duggars but many typical large-very large families have this psychology and mindset, the Duggars are only an example of such.

      P.S. While girls from small families are inculcated to become educated and thinking women on an equal par with men in every arena, girls from large-very large families are inculcated to be wives and mothers and not to be concerned with education and career success. From the time they can walk, they are told that the primary and/or main function of girls is to marry and to have children.

    • Rick 2 years ago

      i just feel really sorry for the eldest daughter, 24 years old and i'm assuming hasn't even kissed a guy, she is in her prime of her life and she is taking care of the kids, these kids besides her are all settling down young and marrying somebody without even exploring themselves, it feels like the duggars are living in the old days and not adjusting to new times, there has to be something in between their extreme rules and miley cyrus, i have a feeling as the younger kids get older there will be quite a few of the kids that rebel and decide they want a different life style

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Rick, let's HOPE so but I doubt it. These children have been so inculcated in the fundamentalistic way that they are quite ensconced in that belief system. It is very sad really. Not only the Duggars but the average child reared in large-very large families are very traditional in their scope. Children from large families tend to marry and have children very young. That is part of the large family culture. Daughters from large families are taught from birth that their only path is marriage and children, education and career are not emphasized. Thank you for stopping by and adding to the discussion.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      In my mind, there is no difference between the Duggar children of reality TV and the TV children of sitcoms who acted out and got in trouble (Todd Bridges, Gary Coleman, Macauley Culkin,, Lindsey Lohan, to name a few). Some of the Duggar children are bound to rebel if only for their own need to express their true self.

    • taralee 2 years ago

      I found this forum very interesting but you are wrong the older daughter Jill became pregnant right after her wedding. She was only married this May not for eight months.

    • Colleen Jeffries 2 years ago

      I grew up in a large foster family. I went 2 school 6:00a.m. - 1:00 pm work part time & help raise my foster parents grandson. All the foster kids did this. We had no childhood. I left joined the USAF. I have no childhood memories of love & Fun. Weird part I had people in my adult life 2 stopped from enjoying my life becuz I was used 2 that treatment. I have finally gotten over that & enjoying life. They did not raise their kids. Trust me what is going on with that money is breaking the film industry law & about the hours of children bring used in film/TV & the money they should be paid. That money should be in a trust until they turn 18 years old. She has a dis order that needed atten. You can tell they are trying to hang on thru their oldest kids that is sick in itself.. The husband is fat while the kids are skinny. Why CPS & the law not investigation the hours of filming & why the kids were not paid & the money was not put in a trust 4 them until they turned 18. That is their money not the parents. My English is not good becuz I went 2 the Dugger's home school taught by the older girls !!!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Colleen you are a brave and intelligent person. All my best to you. You speak the truth. I never thought about the money aspect and where it is going. These Duggar kids will end up like Gary Coleman did without money because the parents mismanaged or spent it all. However unlike Gary the Duggar kids have no self-esteem and no guts to sue their parents.

      I have limited TV where I am currently living. Last night the only thing on was a marathon Duggars special. I cannot believe this screwed up family. Their second child to become engaged has to bring along her 8 yr old brother as a chaperon while on a picnic with her betrothed! How can these two ever get to know one another if they are constantly subjected to intrusive chaperons? And what makes an 8 yr old capable of chaperoning??? WTF??!!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme and Colleen, WTF is an understatement to describe this impaired family( cannot say the EXACT synonym). The children are drones, DRONES who mindlessly follow their parents because they don't know any better. They are ------------ beyond description. Do you hear the theme song for THE ADDAMS FAMILY? They're creepy and they're screwy, the Duggar family. The Duggar children aren't going to sue their parents if the money is mismanaged; all they are going to do is think that the "parents" had their "best" interests at heart. Sad, sad situation, hmmm. They probably won't have any money. They will have meager and minimal skills at best. The only jobs they will have are jobs that will be automated and/or outsourced. Midwive jobs are very, very few with doctors doing the delivery. Well, there will be welfare if it is not severely streamlined. The Duggar children will be in...........HELL-up the proverbial creek without a paddle. Sinking, sinkING, SINKING...........

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Askme and Colleen, as I have stated time and time again, parents of large-very large families clearly DON'T care about their children. All they care about is reproducing children and handing off to their oldest/older child/children to raise. Parents of large-very large families are extremely narcissistic and have mental issues, sometimes bordering on the psychotic. They just thoughtlessly have children without thinking about how to care for them emotionally, psychologically, and especially financially. Large families are more like to be in the lower socioeconomic strata than small families. It is not uncommon for large families to be poor, even impoverished.

      I have written several articles on large families and its detriments. Children from large families LACK. They have an inferior quality of life in terms of parental care/attention, intellectual stimulation, poor nutrition/health/dental care, and poor living conditions. They do not have the things that normal children have. Many large families have to depend upon charities, donations, and have outside assistance to stay socioeconomically afloat. Children from large families lead a tough, primitive, hardscrabble life.

      Parents of large-very large families do not love their children like parents of small families who are loving, caring, and attentive parents who care about their children's wellbeing physically, emotionally, mentally, psychologically, and socioeconomically. The average parent of a large-very large families have quite a lacksadaisical attitude toward their children, if their children success, fine and if they fail, so what.

      Many parents of large-very large families view their children as mealtickets because they are unable to take care of their children. They figure that the more children, the more income. They even take their children out of school and make them work in order to supplement meager parental income. The average parents of large-very large families are very callous towards their children. There is no warm feeling between parent and child like there is in the small family. That is why so many grown children from large-very large families are attention deprived and emotionally needy. They did not receive enough love and attention from their parents.

      It is also typical for children from large families to raise themselves as their parents sure as heck are seldom, if ever, there for them. It is a very precarious existence being in a large-very large family. The ninth circle of hell is preferable than being in large-very large families. The Duggars are only a prototype of the typical, uncaring parents of large-very large families.

    • cozette 2 years ago

      What is wrong with you? Why do you have so much hatred? You COMPLETELY missed the point on why they do this. There views on life state money should not be the MEANING to life, but instead love and spending time together as a family. Money is temporary, love is forever & something you will always have with you for eternity! Your post is filled with so much ignorance, I would like to judge you on the life style you mainly support;

      I can't believe you ship your kids to school for 9 hours a day, then keep them at daycare until 6, where you then pick them up at spend 2 hours with them before bedtime. Your kids are obviously not getting enough time with their PARENTS. Parents are the PRIMARY CAREGIVER. Children learn most of what they know off there parents. But here you are, sticking them with different people each day, knowing very little about what they're actually doing. What are kids for? They're to raise, protect and love. What are you doing? Sticking them with nannies, because oh "I can afford it" while in the mean time you spend insignificant amount of time with your kids and yet somehow wonder why they're 16 going out and having sex, drinking alcohol and experimenting with drugs.

      How did someone judging your lifestyle feel? The Duggar family spends all day together homeschooling and spending quality time with each other. They're with each other every day all day, believe it, they spend more than enough time together! What they do is they're choice and growing up in a big family teaches you so many valuable lessons! I don't see who they are hurting. The children are free to make whatever choices they please when they are old enough. You act like money is everything, where actually, money is just an excesory. Not the primary meaning of life! My oldest boy is studying law and my oldest daughter is a midwife, we are very educated and my life decision is the greatest gift I could have every asked for. We live comfortably and all of my older children each have their own bedroom. Friend, you must learn how to not critique and judge things you do not understand! I will pray for you.

      -Cozette, homeschooling mother of 10, between 3-23, private piano teacher in the evenings & Doctorate degree in music education from Princeton University.

      God Bless!

    • LR 2 years ago

      @Askme-Don't you think it sounds like the Duggars are marrying off their daughters/sisters to boys in their church/religion only? I mean, they intervene too much in their relationships and not let them enjoy. It's typical of fundamentalist religious people.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      Did anyone catch the time a couple of seasons or so ago the camera crew asked the kids who wanted a small family and not a peep?

      Jill seems to be happy playing house and with Quiverfull. But what happens 3-4 kids later and it's not so rosy anymore and she changes her mind about the whole babies are blessings thing? I think that happened to Anna.

      It is ashamed these young people cant avoid pregnancy the first time getting intimate and on a honeymoon. Of course, the die hard fans see it a good thing. I had hope for Derick, but that dwindled. I actually believed Derick would put his foot down on the whole Quiverfull thing.Obviously the Duggars have reeled him in too. Parents should stay out of their kids' reproductive lives. They shouldn't have to make vows of leaving kids to God in their ceremony. Where is this in the Bible? Some are trying to pinpoint when Jill got pregnant. I 95% doubt she was pregnant before the honeymoon. It annoys the fans, but if it were a Gosselin, they would be doing the same.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Cozette Doctorate degree? "There" as in "over there" and Their as in "their beliefs. You don't seem to understand the difference.

      I think you are asking how we would feel having our lifestyle judged? For starters my lifestyle has not been put out there for all to see. I am not opening myself up for the World to watch, evaluate and yes judge my lifestyle whereas the Duggars are.

      We live is a free speech society. If you put your life on TV for all the World to see, then you can expect others to voice their opinions. You have to take the good with the bad. If the Duggars don't like being criticized, then go back to your private life and shun the TV, promotions, and publicity.

      LR: yes I agree. These kids are getting married before they have fully developed as people. They have no idea about who they are, what the like, what they believe. With the younger brothers chaperoning the engaged couple, the couple has no privacy to talk freely about how they want to live their lives, intimate details that only a couple should discuss and know about each other--can't happen with the intrusive little eyes of a younger sibling watching.

      Think about this: how much do you trust your children to be mature enough to get married if you don't trust them to be alone with their engaged???

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, I refuse to respond to Cozette as she is the quintessential parent of a large family(I shall not go into details but the point is aptly illustrated in her response) is critical of parents in small families who plan for their children's future. So what if the parents have nannies for the children. Parents of large families have NANNIES also-they are called OLDEST/OLDER children who are forced to parent their younger siblings while the parents aimlessly and mindlessly reproduce. What a hypocrite statement. At least nannies are adults while the oldest/older siblings are children themselves.

      Askme, I seriously doubt that she has a Ph.D. A child in late elementary school knows the difference between there and their. This is simple grammar. As I have stated before, it is the lesser educated parent who has large-very large families because they do not or will not realize the benefits of family planning. It is also the less intelligent parent who apt for large-very large families, knowing the detriments physically, emotionally, psychologically, mentally, and especially socioeconomically if having a large number of children.

      Askme, parents of large-very large families have a vastly different mentality and psychology from the rest of intelligent, educated, and normal people. No use in beating a dead horse. A "Doctorate" from "Princeton"? Oh, please, no one can have a Ph.D. from Princeton and be this clueless, really now. Nice talking to you again Askme. You are always welcome to come by..

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Askme, the woman does not have a Doctorate from Princeton. Seriously doubt it! No one has an advanced degree and does not understand simple grammar, c'mon now. That and OTHER things! Then she indicated that money isn't important. Yes, IT IS. To reiterate, large-very large families have a poverty consciousness which is the result of growing up in LACK! SAD, isn't it. Well, ALL kinds, ALL KINDS!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      Czette@No money isnt everything, but it doesnt mean to throw away all logic about having kids.Kids deserve roofs over their head and full bellies each night They need to experience culture.

      There is no way 19 kids get one on one with parents. I recall in early episodes they had a sign up sheet on the frig if the kids wanted one on one time.Michelle doesnt even homeshcool anymore. I really cant see how they spend more time with each kids than parents who work. Furthermore, the kids do not have choices. I fail to see 21 people all wanting to follow the courtship rules, females all wanting to wear skirts and so forth.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Amanda, you are talking to a brick wall. That woman is typical of a parent of a large-very large family. They believe in reproducing children ad infinitum, not caring about the ramifications of this act on their children. Parents of large-very large families really don't care if their children have a socioeconomic affluent lifestyle. It is typical for parents of large-very large families to live from hand to elbow. Amanda, the average large-very large family is from poor to very impoverished. Again, I sincerely doubt that the woman in question has a doctorate degree because no one with a doctorate degree has the lacksadaisical attitude that she has toward family planning. Her thinking is more in line with a person with little education.

      You are right as usual Amanda. Children need things beyond the rudiments. They need beauty, culture, and luxury. However, children in large-very large families DON'T have beauty, culture, and luxury. They are lucky to have the bare rudiments, if that. They live an existence which one can describe as very primitive, even prisoners live better than children from large-very large families.

      Of course, children from large-very large families DON'T get individualized parental time. That is why they have attention issues and look for attention in all the wrong places. Most of the children who join gangs are from large-very large families because they did not receive the prerequisite attention from their parents. Many children from large- very large families are prey to the some of the more negative types of people because they did not receive the prerequisites at home. There are girls from large-very large families become teen mothers because they feel for the first male who gave them attention. Large-very large families are aberrant and any parent who elects to have such families need psychiatric counselling for they are not mentally sound.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Amanda, thank you again for stopping by as you are always welcome to do so. The "life" of children in large-very large families is full of socioeconomic struggle, even being impoverished. Children live at the MOST basic existence with very little food, inferior clothing, no health/medical/dental care, living on top of each other-living in the open, having very little adult guidance.

      There was a study by Zajonc, a psychologist, indicating that children in large-very large families are intellectually undeveloped and immature because all they have to communicate with are OTHER siblings. They raise themselves(that goes without saying) or each other. It's a very primitive existence at best. Children from large-very large families look like orphans-malnourished, wearing clothing that no one else would wear, etc.

      Well, the "life" of children in large-very large families can be described as........HELL. You have elucidated the point so succinctly! Homeless people in shelters live better than the average child in a large-very large family!

    • Angye 2 years ago

      OMG !! I just read this and Im totally surprise. What is that thing about having nannies raising or helping ?? I guess is kind a duty if Im the older to help the youngest. Honestly I dont see whats wrong with this family, the kids are well dressed, feed and educated. I remember when Michelle used to buy clothes in second hand stores and is perfectly fine. Im european, well educated as well as my husband and we dont believe in nannies or any other help. I have a career and I gave up in order to raise my kids. That was my believe and not release my duties to an stranger. I dont have mental traumas and in fact I was the only child with a silver spoon when I born. I have 4 boys and are well educated and I raised to be a gentleman. I can do everything and I teach them that..from cooking to build a wall or teach my knowledge in medicine. I found the Douggars well educated and even I dont believe in their religion I found that they dont hurt anybody. If TL paid them, fantastic!!!!!!!!! Bravo ...at least I dont have a bunch of red necks living on my taxes..and believe me I have a lotttttttttt in NY. So please dont pretend that everybody around is sick because they decide to have a large family that dad supports. BTW those girls are fantastic and they dont have "friends with benefits" which the only benefit is giving their vagina to everybody and getting naked in front of cameras or totally drunk. Sorry Im an old fashion woman

    • NancyJarrett profile image

      NancyJarrett 2 years ago from Lompoc, California

      I have spent most of my evening reading the pros and cons about small families vs large ones.

      I was born in 1954 in California. The society was very different in those days compared to today.

      I have one older brother. We are 15 months a part. In those days women stayed home and raised the children, cleaned house, did errand, and made all the meals. Son's were treated differently than daughter's.

      My mother was a den mother for the boy scouts and a brownie leader. She was also the PTA President.

      My father worked in Glendale, commuting daily to his job.

      We had nice three bedroom house in Anaheim. All the food we could eat, nice clothes and shoes. We didn't want for anything. Here is where the story takes a nice twist.

      On the outside to friends and family we looked and acted like the perfect upper middle class family. Once you pull the curtain is pulled back, you saw a mother and father giving all the love and attention to the son, because in these times, male children were thought more highly of then daughters.

      I can't help thinking this form of thinking, still goes on today. I see it in the Duggar family. Male children are seen as manual hard labors where as the girls are treated as homemakers, babysitters for the younger siblings. However, form of thinking applies to families with one to two children when there is one of each sexes in the family dynamics. At least it was in my family.

      If you go by todays definition of abuse, my brother and I would have been taken away from my parents. My father, although he lived with us was absent most of the time do to his long commute to work.

      My mother was a closet alcoholic and prescription drug abuser. At the age of nine it was my duty to take care of the house and my mother. When my father died three years later, my mother took to her bed for four months. My brother paid all the bills (my mother had him put onto her checking account) it was up to him to make sure he and I ate. In the year of 1967 fast food was just starting to come into fashion.

      We were not allowed to talk to uncles, aunts, cousins, or grandparents about what was happening in our home. There really were no child abuse laws like we have today. Neither my brother or I would have contacted the police, children just didn't do that. There was one time I told my grandfather, between my brother and my mother I was properly punished and told never to speak of what was really going on in our house. I was dubbed a liar within my extended family.

      Of course no one would ever think my mother would neglect her children during her time of grief.

      My brother and I have not seen or spoken to each other for over 30 years.

      He got married in 1970 and moved far away.

      I got married in 1971 and moved far away.

      I took care of my mother till the day she died.

      My family was, if not more dysfunctional as a large family. When my father past away, my family died with him.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Nancy, you're wrong! If your family was large-very large(6 0r more kids) your situation would be more dire. You would be RAISING your younger siblings in addition to taking care of your mother. You would not have a life at all. You would have never married but used for the benefit of your mother and then your younger siblings. Your life would not be your own at all. Your situation although bad isn't as bad as most. The average child in a large-very large family grow up impoverished and parents DON'T give him/her the prerequisite parental attention. These children raise themselves and each other due to the parents' endless reproduction, thinking of THEIR needs, not the children's. At least you did not go hungry and had the amenities and your father was there. In large-very large families, parents AREN'T there for the children, they had to struggle even for the rudiments. Be grateful for what you had-you had a father although your mother was an alcoholic, she was intelligent and responsible enough to have a small family.

    • NancyJarrett profile image

      NancyJarrett 2 years ago from Lompoc, California

      I agree with you in part. I can't remember my father because he was absent in my life. My mother was not functioning do to her alcohol use and prescription drug use.

      From the time I was nine, I was running the house, laundry, dished, vacuuming and so on. I was also taking care if my mother. I didn't have a normal childhood. My childhood stopped at age nine with the struggle to hide my mothers condition from everyone. I couldn't have friends over to our house. However, my brother did have a childhood. He went to his friends house instead of having them over.

      I forgot to mention in my first post, that my father had three other daughters by two other wives. My mother was the only one to give my father a son he so deeply wanted.

      Dysfunction is born from the dynamics of the parents. The way children are treated within that family. As I pointed out in my first post, the society of my family placed more value on sons then daughters.

      I was just wondering if this form of thinking still holds true in large families? When I watch the Duggar family, I see the females as only future wives and homemakers and also to make babies.

      Their mother seems to be glad that her older daughter is to marry and is looking forward to new grand babies with and almost sick joy.

      Perhaps since my father had six children even though we never all lived together, the large family dynamics were an underline issues.

      In closing, my mother would have had more children but she and any future children were at high risk. You see, she was RH negative and my father was RH positive.

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      Angye@The DUggars look all nice on TV. These young women do more than help.As far as 'giving away vaginas' that is extreme black and white think. They are just as obsessed about sex as those who sleep around. Jim Bob dry humps Michelle on a gofl course in front of their kids who cant hold hands Jim Bob asked Michelle does this turn your on? Another time they were making out telling the unmarried couple Jessa and Ben you cant do this yet. The Duggars act so proud of themselves it is worse than 'giving away vaginas'.

      NancyJarret I am sorry for you situation but it doesnt justify the Duggars.Larger families for some reason have always been associated with higher moral values. That is not the case when I read about those who grew up like the Duggars.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Nancy, in the typical large-very large family(6 or more kids per family), girls are inculcated to be wives and mothers from childhood. Education is not stressed so much for girls of large-very large families as it is thought that they are going to get married anyway. In large-very large families, sons are more important than daughters. Girls in large-very large families are taught to be subordinate to the males in the household. In large-very large families, everything is strictly hierarchical. There is very differential treatment in large-very large families-oldest/older children are waylaided/cast aside, middle children are lost in the shuffle, and the youngest/younger children are pampered and indulged. Daughers, esp. oldest/older daughters, in large-very large families are slaves on call 24/7/365.

      While your small family Nancy was an exception. Life in small families is beautiful and idyllic where children are loved, given the utmost attention, opportunities, and amenities. Parents love and care for their children in small families, they RAISE the children, not push them off on the oldest/older child to raise. Daughters in small families(1-2 children per family) are treated as individuals and are expected to be educated and successful. Daughters in such families are treated equal to sons in the typical small family. Large-very large families are HELL, prisoners live better than children in the large-very large family.

    • NancyJarrett profile image

      NancyJarrett 2 years ago from Lompoc, California

      I agree with your opinion about large/very large families. I see how you all come to this conclusion.

      I would like to know why you all seem to only pick out the Duggar's? I am sure there are other families out there that have just as many children, if not more.

      The record holder for having one mother giving birth to 69 children.

      Years ago large families were needed to work fields and ranches. I am sure there are a lot of people in the south that still have large/very large families. My step-father came from a family of 14 kids. They lived in a small house in Tennessee.

      My step-father only had a third grade education. He had to go to work to help support the family. He also told us, that incest was away of life in his family.

      We have a little thing called birth control and abortions. There is no reason to have that many children.

      I just don't understand why the Duggar name is even mentioned in these post.

      Yes, they chose to put their family on display for the world to see. That in it's self makes them a target. However, if this is just a forum on large/very large families then lets leave their name out of it.

      Reality shows on television are anything but real life. As far as i am concerned, they can take all the reality shows off and put Carol Burnett back on.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I used the Duggars as a prototype for large-very large families. Large-very large families are indeed pathological, if not abhorrent.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Nancy, I want to add that people who willingly have large-very large families rate low on the intelligence quotient. They are also selfish and abhorrent parents who only care about what THEY want, they really don't give a good rat's ------about their children's well-being and future. They are condemning their children to impoverishment throughout life and fifth best. In essence, children from large-very large families will experience only CRAP in life.

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Proving GM's point again Amy! Such anger and nastiness.

      And Amy, regardless of what you think having " 19 and counting" kids is not anyway to raise children who are confident, independent and self-sufficient. especially with the intrusive eye of the camera on you at all times. My guess is one of these kids would freak out if they found them self all alone one day. They have no clue about who they are, how to be an independent strong person. It all about MOB thinking and never asserting yourself! Sad, very sad.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, Amy's idiotic rant is typical large family thinking. I have deleted her post as it is too unintelligent for words. Large-very large families teach their daughters to be forced laborers and that they are subordinate to male authority. It teaches sons that women are inferior objects to be done with as they will. It also teaches sons not to respect women i.e. the Kennedy brothers believed that they were superior to women and saw women as nothing but vessels. Children in large-very large families have a POOR sense of self as they are inculcated in the premise that self-love and self-assertion are SELFISH and EVIL. No, contrary to the idiotic philosophy that children from large-very large families are independent, children from such families tend to be act and think in packs. They are uncomfortable being alone and will be/marry anyone to avoid being alone. That is so sad, Askme. I LOVE being alone. It is sad to grow up anonymous and in a crowd. Thank you for stopping by Askme, you are ALWAYS welcome. The average person from a large-very large family is an anonymous cog, not an individual!

    • LR. 2 years ago

      @Angye-What do you think of boys giving their penises to everyone and getting naked and flexing their muscles in front of cameras drunk and not having friends with benefits? Sure there are lots of males who do that that old-fashioned males hate it and think it's not gentlemanly for boys to give their penises to anyone, get naked, and flex their muscles like male hookers and male strippers. To them, any male like that has no class when he flaunts his half-naked to naked body to women, especially married women who have husbands who could kill these men.

    • carrol 2 years ago

      the devil is sure incharge of these horny horny horny freaks.get them all fixed

    • VJGSA profile image

      VJG 2 years ago from Texas

      The mother has said that the older kids help raise the younger kids. My wife says that's not fair to the older kids and the younger kids don't have mom and dad as their parental figures. Could having 19 kids be considered selfish?

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 2 years ago

      Selfish? Yes I think so VJGSA

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Not only selfish but unthinking and evil. There is no positive way to describe parents who reproduce ad infinitum. Such "parents" are evil and unthinking in addition to being egotistical. They want to make THEIR MARK in society; however, having a lot of children does not equal strength but impoverishment. It is utterly futile to have a large family as you and your children are reduced to socioeconomic poverty hence powerlessness. There is NO power en masse but there is POWER in economic wealth. It is those with money who has the ultimate power. Sad, that so many fail to realize this. Oh well.......

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      I just read a post titles"Why Have More Kids" obviously by a Quiverfull follower. They have 6 and expecting 7. The mom got a comment saying if you are tired why do you keep having kids. Then she talks about how they are gifts from God and so forth.You can tell the judgment in her comments and supporters. I left a comment saying you don't love kids. you just like having them. She seems ot understand a couple may be infertile but she really comes down on those who limit family size on purpose. Sure, the kids may not care about 75 cent shirts from thrift stores. It is because of the poverty mindset instilled in them and they feel unworthy of anything better. Now, I don't think there is anything wrong with used clothing, but kids need to feel like they are individuals worthy of a new outfit occasionally . It isn't their fault the parents had too many kids. I really feel bad for these kids. They are treated like trophies in Quiverfull..

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      AMEN, Amanda, a RESOUNDING AMEN. You see large families have a quite different psychology than small families. You are right in saying that the kids "don't care" about 75 cents shirts; however, they DO care when other children wear more expensive, better quality clothing. These are the kids who shake down more affluent children for money and cut their clothes because they have inferior quality clothing. Children in large families are inculcated to believe that they are less, personae non gratae, and oftentimes have the lowest of imaginable self-esteem. They believe that to have any sense of self is selfish hence EVIL. Parents of large families are doing their children a .........GREAT DISSERVICE!

    • greeneyedblondie profile image

      greeneyedblondie 2 years ago

      I love the idea for big families, but 19 (and 20) can seem like a bit much--especially if it's all the older children doing the raising. I HATE that idea. I want to have a big family myself someday but I really hate it when the oldest(s) are "mommy's and daddy's little helpers." Why can't the rest of them be "helpers?" Why can't they all be children? The religious aspect always creeped me out. With that big of a family religion can become like a cult.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @greeneyedblondie, this is what happens in families where there are 6 or children per household. The parents DON'T raise the children at all-not one iota. It is ALWAYS the oldest and/or older children who raise the younger siblings thus missing out on their childhoods/adolescent years. Many oldest children of large families DON'T have a life of their own nor individual time. They have to be there for parents and siblings 24/7/365. They are simply unpaid slaves. Slave laborers have more freedom than oldest children in large families.

      That is a fact of life. Children from large families have very little or no parental interaction. Parents of large families are only parents in the physical sense of the word and in name only. That is they just reproduce and after the birth of the child, give the child to the oldest/older children to raise. Oldest children in large families are THE REAL parents in the family. That is why children in large families are attention starved. They receive little/no parental attention so they oftentimes have issues when they become adults. Many are not good parents because they did not have the proper parenting in their formative years. They have an arrested development as far as parenting goes. They make perfunctory parents because that was the way they were raised.

      Children in large families also have no sense of self and no sense of privacy. They were taught that they, as individuals, are of no consequence and that the group is more imporant than the individual. They are told that to be an individual is akin to being selfish so having a sense of self is taboo and forbidden in large families. If you have ever observed a child from a large family, he/she has low high esteem and is self-abneging. They have nothing that they can call their own and no individual space. It is common for children in large families to live on top of each other and in the open. Privacy is a foreign word in the large family environment.

      Children in large families simply aren't raised in normal environments like children in small families are. They have to raise themselves and/or each other from an early age as the parents AREN'T there for them. They also have to work from childhood to get the things that normal chlldren have. They have poor or no health, medical, and/or dental care. If it weren't for school doctors and nurses, children from large families wouldn't receive any type of medical care at all. They consume inferior quality food as more nutritious food is cost prohitive to the average large family. Children in large families learn to DO without VERY EARLY and it is a constant condition in the large family environment. That is why children in large families develop a poverty mindset, psychology, and consciousness because SOCIOECONOMIC WANT and POVERTY is a normative lifestyle in large families. They also wear inferior and cast off clothing.

      In large families, socioeconomic depression is not just a economic slump but every day life in large families. Most large families are either poor to impoverished with children have only the rudiments if they are lucky. The average large family receives some type of aid in order to stay socioeconomically afloat. Parents who have large families are thoughtless and unconcerned regarding the welfare of their children. Small families are better for the children in terms of parental time, attention, and in socioeconomic opportunies. I wrote the article on the Duggars to demonstrate the detriments of large family life. The Duggars were simply prototype of the quintessential parent of large families.

    • JAN 2 years ago

      I agree that children in large families do not get enough parental attention. I am the third oldes of 8 - and I was a helper non-stop. I resented the endless messes my younger siblings made - and would beg my friends to have me visit their homes. My sister and I washed dishes for ten people every night. I am not saying my mom did not work hard also - but it really sucked to have to work so hard at an early age (10-18).

      ALSO - no one has mentioned that there is a population explosion world-wide and these dummies claim there is not crisis. The planet is having a hard time sustaining the food supply and sanitation necessary - and they just keep popping out children.

      I really think these people ARE mentally ill!!!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Jan, children in large families DO lead hellish lives, especially the oldest/older children. They are conscripted slaves who must be on 24/7/365. Prisoners in gulags and forced labor camps have it better than oldest/older children in large families. Jan, I have written several hubs on oldest children in large/very large families, check them out. Such hubs describe your situation succinctly well.

      I remember as a child, some of my friends from large families were always out and about. One of them called me to go out, I said no. She asked me why was I ALWAYS at home, well I was an only child and had no intrusive siblings, had space, and lots of privacy so there was NO need for me to ESCAPE. Many oldest/older children HATE being in large families because they are unpaid slaves. No child should have to endure this-all because of selfish, thoughtless parents who are too lazy to use contraceptives! Parents who have large families are mentally ill and in need of good psychiatric help for they are having children because of an unfulfilled need and void in their lives which could be used more constructively than to continuing pop out children ad infinitum!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      It seems Quivefull keeps coming apart at the seams. First, Bill Gothard, Doug Phillips and now the Jeubs. The Jeubs were on a TLC special"Cheaper by the Dozen". Two of the oldest daughters(actually Wendy's) had lready left, but now two more older daughters have accused Wendy and Chris Jeub of abuse. Cynhtia Jeub describes the events on her blog, CynthiaJeub.com. They played the happy family in public. She said once Wendyhit her then 11 yr old brother so hard he had to wear make-up.It makes me concerned for the Duggars and Bates. I really cant picture them doing that to their kids, but you never know.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Not only the "Quiverfull" families but such behavior occurs in typical large families. Corporal and other forms of harsh punishments are commonplace in large families. Parents are often emotionally and mentally overwhelmed in large families with the large amount of children in the household so they routinely resort to physical discipline to chastise children. Parents seldom talk to chilldren in large families so the only form of discipline is often corporal.

      Large families cause more undue stress upon the parents as there are more children than they can emotionally/mentally interface with properly. The larger the family, the harsher the punishments because of the high level of stress. Again, THAT is why small families are better overall-LESS STRESS for the parents and MORE time to interact with their children.

    • mellowde 2 years ago

      This quiverful stuff, isn't that what the chinese practice? And isn't that why there are so many in China that they have been behind the 8 ball so to speak for 25 centuries? Living in a house that looks like a barn in order to house and feed the large clan will have the effect of causing the children to leave like there's a plague at some point. The floodgate once opened will give the impetus for the children to flee. How many more marriages will occur in the next year or 2? And just to get out of the dysfunctional zoo? What goes around comes around. You use your children for self-agrandisement and it come back to haunt. The show will be 2 left and counting as the Duggars contemplate divorce and sale of community property so it can be divided between JimBobBoy and Michelle. Now that is a show all will watch.

    • Lissa Clason profile image

      Lissa Clason 2 years ago from Raleigh, North Carolina

      I feel bad for those kids. Having time with your parents is very important, and they don't get to experience that. The older kids especially don't have a normal childhood, because they always have to watch the little ones. There's so much stress on them, and they shouldn't have to deal with that much responsibility at a young age. If they have more children, that means even more divisions of time and income to support each child, so each child will be more deprived of the things they need. It's unfair to the kids they already have, so they shouldn't have anymore. Also, the courting thing is really creepy D:

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Lissa, of course the older children have NO normative childhood/adolescence. Not only the Duggars but typical oldest children in large /very large families spend their childhoods/adolescence raising younger siblings. Oldest children in such families become weary physically, emotionally,and psychologically quite early in life. They are akin to slaves/forced laborers. Prisoners of war have easier lives than the typical oldest child/older children in large/very large families. Parents of large/very large families are selfish, thoughtless, and careless pure and simple.

    • donna 2 years ago

      Do any of you know Jim-Bob's net worth? It's 3.5 MILLION!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 2 years ago

      Author Paul Hunter one of 21 kids, recently criticized the Duggars. He says his mom spent more time at a homeless shelter than with them and some of the older kids dont speak to the mom. In fact, his mom said to call her E and not mom. His dad did nothing bu work.

      Also, we should be careful commenting only on how women dress. Men do the same thing with tight jeans, shorts, and muscle shirts. Look in third world countries where women still get raped fully clothed. Slut shaming is why some sexual abuse victims never come forward. Everyone should be responsible for their own eyes. When a male blames a female for wearing booty shorts , then there are issues with him.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      @Amanda, as I have reiterated endlessly-LARGE FAMILIES ARE PATHOLOGICAL! Need I say MORE!

    • Canadian 2 years ago

      I Think this family is crazy

    • Canadian 2 years ago

      Everyone says that the family doesn't rely on government assistance..... but doesn't the american family subsudize something for child/baby bonus like they do in canada it might only be a small amount but it's something.....and times that by 19+ thats a good chunk of change. There was someone saying Jim bob is work 3.5 million ws that before or after the show??? You never see what happens behind the cameras only what they edit, so whos to say this family is ohh so happy?? I can guarentee theres stuff they dont want you to see which would be sure to 'ruin' the picture perfect family. They need to stop having kids, can michelle even feel sex anymore? Im sure her vagina is a revolving door and most likely loose. But i guess it's fine for Jim bob that creepy pediphile looking man.....wouldn't it be crazy if it turned out he was a child molester just like the dad on 7th heaven ???

    • LR 2 years ago

      @Amanda-If women rape men in tight jeans, shorts, vests with no shirt underneath, and muscle shirts, men will rape them back in self-defense because they are physically stronger and bigger which makes them able to fight back. We should be aware of that. And we do slut shame women for raping men. It's dangerous for women to try to rape men because they will rape back.

      Other than that men who dress provocatively to attract women are asking for trouble and then they fight back, rape, kill, or even kidnap women in self-defense as if they are predatory gigolos. A female who blames a male for wearing booty shorts and other manly provocative clothing, then there are issues with her as to why she was raped back in self defense. And men hate to be objectified by women because it hurts their masculinity. Female on male rape is dangerous and therefore emasculates men, causing them to be violent. Check out the comments on this blog about female on male rape: http://hellburns.blogspot.com/2012/07/movies-magic...

    • good bar 2 years ago

      I can wait to see when these older two girl finally get in bed already

    • amroddy@netzero.com 2 years ago

      LR@You are making a logical fallacy-in other words a strawman.

      good bar@Two of the daughters married this year.

    • Holly D 23 months ago

      I agree with this article...the family is selfish & disgusting & in our world of over population they just need to stop. And, their beautiful kids are going to be a total brainwashed genetic contribution to our human race. They are disgusting.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 23 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Holly, you are correct in your assessment of the Duggar "parents". They care nothing at all about their children. Their children are indeed brainwashed and they are going to suffer unless they see what their "parents" are doing to them. However, it is highly improbable that these children will break away from their conditioning.

    • Alicia Mc Cormack 22 months ago

      I think the Duggars are the most happy and well adjusted family I have ever seen! I wish I was one of those lucky kids. They are respectful, theyhave manners, they are loving and kind. If more families were like them we would have alot less problems in the world!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 22 months ago

      THEY ARE ROBOTS. Devoid of emotion and empathy, similar to people with Asperger's. Recent controversy is one of the Duggar kids kicking a cat and laughing hysterically about it.

      I highly disagree Alicia about "less problems in the World" if there were more people like the Duggars! I think the more mindless breeding, the more problems due to not enough adults to provide direction and emotional nurturing of their children!

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 22 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Askme, well said. Parents of large families CAN'T devote the prerequisite attention to their children. That is simple mathematics. There are MORE children to go around and someone HAS to suffer which are usually the older children while the younger children receive THE MOST. That is why children from large families have serious issues including Madonna, the late Michael Jackson, and Mark Wahlberg. All had issues because they did not receive enough attention as children.

    • triangles 21 months ago

      I am familiar with the Quiverful, Pearl, Gothard, etc. methods which the Duggar parents advocate. I find it all alien and in many ways abusive. But, I am also a professional astrologer and have been for the past thirty years, so I decided to take a quick look at the natal charts of some of the Duggar children to see if there are any aspects or patterns which would confirm my suspicions and the suspicions of many on this thread. I will begin by affirming there is trouble in paradise at the Duggar home.

      One aspect that nearly all of the kids have is a Sun/Saturn and or Mars/Saturn. The sun represents the father, mars represents action and courage, and saturn represents restrictions, burdens, and responsibilities. In negative aspects (which is what they have), children feel fear and lack self esteem. Mars/ saturn aspect are frequent in children who have suffered emotional and physical abuse. Which children have Sun/Saturn or Mars/Saturn? Jana, John David, Joshua, Jason, Jordyn, Jackson, Jennifer, Jessa, Jedidiah, Jeremiah, James, and Jason.

      In addition there are strong signs of anger in many of the charts. These kids may not be allowed to express it now, but one day it will come out. Who has major anger issues? Joseph, Joshua, Jason, Justin, Jordyn, Josiah, James, Jason, Jackson. Jordyn has a very difficult chart in terms of repression and anger, and I worry about her the most.

      At least half of the children have difficult Venus/Saturn aspects which indicate a lack of warmth and nurturing.

    • BW 20 months ago

      What gets me is the hypocrisy and the double standards. The first season they dressed in hideous clothing, claimed they had no Internet or TV.

      As they evolve you notice they have MACBOOK PROS, dressing in more stylish clothing, their hair is styled and they even wear makeup lol. They're making millions of dollars but try to portray that they're frugal and buy everything 'second hand'. And OMG they can't hold hands until they're officially 'engaged'? They can only have 'side hugs'??? I'm sure they're dencent Christian folk, but I just find some of their ways disgusting, unpractical and shocking at times.

      They're in it for the money. They're writing books now? What kind of advice could these little girls possibly give? How to play house? How abstainence is the path we should take? As annoying as they Are, I wish them well!

    • Askme profile image

      Pritchard 20 months ago

      Oh my GM the $#** has hit the fan! Duggars older son accused of child molesting! Your title for this Hub was prophetic. We are just beginning to find out the depth of this family's dysfunction.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 20 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW. I think you or another person has stated that before. I read the news yesterday. Large/very large families are PATHOLOGICAL in more ways than one. More news is YET to come.........and people have the unmitigated gall, nerve to say that small families raise spoiled, selfish children. While large/very large families raise delinquents, hoodlums, children w/no self-esteem, teen mothers, and other negative types. Children in large/very large families are very insular and parochial in outlook. Large/very large families are also dysfunctional in addition to being pathological. I bet that there is INCEST in that family also. Yes, it has HIT and more dark secrets are going to be revealed!!!!!

    • Amanda Roddy profile image

      Amanda Roddy 20 months ago

      The 'sin in the camp' story had been rumor or years. when I stopped being a fan, I still dismissed it. Now, the cat is out of the bag. The story goes Oprah was going to have them on an episode and someone tipped them off. One should figure Oprah wouldn't cancel an episode based on some gossip. She has money an connections.At the least, I think she was gong to ask them about it. Then, a commenter named'Alice' told the story how Oprah wined and dined them in Chicago before she got the tip,but it was never proven.

      Anyhow, Josh should have been removed from that home. The though of them having to live with him and act as though everything is ok turns my stomach. Now, the original record has been destroyed. It makes me concerned for the Bates kids as well. Who knows what goes on there?. I wonder how common incest is in bigger families. If Gil and Kelly Bates had any sense they would take their kids off tv. Minor kids get paid nothing on reality tv in most states. Only a handful of states pay them as actors. This case is sad and I feel it won't be forgotten for a long time. I think for sure it has waken many fans up. P.S.It was Derick who tried to run over a cat.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 20 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      I have stated that large/very large families are dysfunctional, even pathological.

    • dmartin 15 months ago

      I am sick of every time I turn on the internet there are the duggers. Why are there faces still smeared all over the place. Hearing that they only have like 3 million dollars and there in poverty, that they are trying to have another baby, they are starting a new reality show is revolting. Haven't we had enough of these people. They need to support the son in the help he needs and quit trying to produce more. Explain to the daughter she doesn't need to keep raising money and go to third world countries to learn spanish we have lots of people in this country she can learn from, and they all need to get jobs and a life. People quit falling for the garbage they are dishing out. I feel stupider every time I see one of there names.

    • Farawaytree profile image

      Michelle Zunter 15 months ago from California

      Great hub! I think we saw some of the dysfunction come out in the media this summer didn't we? Spot on!

    • Ripsimeh 13 months ago

      I am a professional teacher. I have been in the public educational system 20 years. Unfortunately it isn't just the Dugger family that expect children to raise children. I've seen people with 2 and 3 children have nothing to do with them. Where I worked we used to have meetings describing how our students lives were like outside of school. Almost all were latch key and had no supervision at all. Many parents were almost never home. I think it is important for all parents to decide if they want children that they will be there for them otherwise I think they shouldn't have any. Wow!! 19 children. How does this woman keep her private parts. I think many women would have had a prolapsed uterus long time ago. They really have 3 million dollars? Is this monthly or what. What is the frequency of their salary? Well if they are abusing the children someone phone child protective agency where they live. I don't know about the state where they live but in mine. Abusive parents get jail time and the children taken away

    • UHUH 8 months ago

      I disagree with you. I was raised by a parenst who were religious fanatics. I grew up with the same naive, idealistic, unrealistic thinking as their children are now growing up with. My sister, who was the older, opted not to have children as did the second oldest. They had already parented most of their lives, why should they want children. I think the reason that the Duggars are producing this many kids is because "God tells them to". My parents had 8 children because "Got told them to". My mother, who left my father and then became a lot more normal (it's good to be the youngest child who gets the normal mother, let me tell you!!!), only wanted 2 children. She couldn't have two children because "God said so" and my father would not "allow" it. Thankfully "God stopped at 8". This made my father rather angry which is interesting to me because this was "God's decision" so was he angry at God? Who knows. He's impossible to talk to because religion trumps all. I don't know what woke my mother up from the sick life she was living in a religious organization. I think she was just too smart to stay. "Men are rulers", "women should obey and let the man lead" "bring children into My family" (that's God speaking). It's put into your brain over and over an over. The same words are repeated until the brain forms patterns that can not be undone. Being raised by these parents has taken a toll on my life. Even though they divorced when I was young, I still got both of their "religious teachings". It was a constant submersion of "be a good person" "always do the right thing" "always do what you're told" "all people deserve forgiveness". I married a man who hit me, I forgave him over and over and prayed he would stop. That God would show him what I knew, that there was a better way. Idealism never works. Idealism is great when it is taught with realism but it very rarely is. You go to a Holocaust Museum, you should focus on the atrocities of a man destroying millions because he was on drugs and needed power. You shouldn't instantly equate with the religious aspect of abortion. It's just the idealistic conditioning over and over. I'm nwt in my 40s, have finally left my abusive husband and recently discovered that unless I deprogram, I am doomed to keep this vicious cycle going in my head. The guilt and confusion becomes unbearable. I have to "cheat" and pray so that my brain will relax. I have to repeat the words of the Bible I've heard all of my life just so I don't have anxiety attacks. My brain has been conditioned to relax when I hear those words, "seek God when you can't handle something, HE will handle it". You are not your own person. "God is in control". Once I am relaxed by these words, I can then formulate rational thoughts about what I want to do going forward and yet I still need to come back to the words to reach new levels. As a human, we seek to have control and most people make good choices and that's how they have good lives but when you grow up in religion, you are NEVER in control. "God is in control", your parents are given the "power" by God to make sure you follow. AKA they beat and drill it into you. I guess you could call it mental illness, I call it cult brainwashing. Mental illness to me is something you are born with, a part of the brain that has a physica.l chemical imbalance. I was born with a perfectly balance brain. I know this because I am capable of fighting the brain washing (at least now). I think this is more of a case of damaged parents, who are unsure of their own worth, raising kids to be damaged because they have decided to give their power over to something else instead of taking responsibility for their own actions and working through their pain. It's a copout basically. Sadly, my kids are now also damaged. I didn't figure it out in time to save them. I've convinced my daughter to try a different way with my grandson. She's not good at it because she only knows what she's grown up in, she's just not consistent enough. At my age, I could be consistent enough because I've figured it out. In the very least the boy is not being beaten into submission. I want her to work on more balance. He's a very nice boy who has never been hit. We just have to make sure he doesn't swing in the opposite direction and be thoughtless and callous. I don't know if that will work either because the truth is, I don't know how to raise mentally healthy children. I see so few of them in life. Almost everyone I know is into religion and religion and healthy children can never be synonymous. And so although I think that Duggars are severely mentally damaged, calling them mentally ill insults those who are actually mentally ill by chemical imbalace and deserve respect because they have a "disease". This is more of a case of broken people brainwashing their children by living in extremes and not being smart enough to raise their own children so they turn to a "God" to do so. After all "God is in control"! You are excused from all wrong doing because you are a mere mortal. Now forgive yourself and forgive others, wash, rinse, repeat.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 8 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Excellent commentary, in utter agreement. The Duggars as average parents of large/very large families have a quite different psychology perspective than parents of small families who truly care about the welfare & future of their children. Parents of large/very large families really don't care about their children beyond giving birth.

    • 7 months ago

      The Duggars parents having 19 kids made me suspect that the Duggars is definitely hiding something. The Duggars mother giving birth at a fast rate every year make it clear she is using a contraceptive pr something like that.

    • 7 months ago

      I read your commentary and it was very good. I believe that the Duggar mother definitely have a sick obsession of getting pregnant again. The Duggar mother and father is ignorant because they refused to realize that having 19 children is already enough. Both the Duggar parents should be lock up at a mental institution. The Duggar parents should be ashamed of themselves for not letting the children having fun. The most serious examples of this is that the parents never let their children trick and treat in every Halloween and lying to the children about Halloween and not letting them go to beaches. By not letting the children having fun, it make it clear that the Duggar parents love to have control over their children.

    • gmwilliams profile image
      Author

      Grace Marguerite Williams 7 months ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

      Yes, something is amiss with Michelle. No person in his/her right mind has NINETEEN children. Where is the logic, really now!

    • stoudtamysue@gmail.com 7 months ago

      The Duggars said that God's punishing the homosexuals down in Orlando,Florida on this past Sunday. That Isn't God's doing that's Satan's doing.God doesn't punished people he'll do that during the judgement day.I know homosexuals will not inherit the earth. Homosexuals been around been around since the beginning of time .Michelle Duggar has no room to talk she has a sister is a lesbian .Everybody has family skeletons in the closet. God will deal with the homosexuals during judgement day.God's rules Don"t change.

    • Lori 7 months ago

      This article is complete rubbish. This family is remarkable and each child is a gift. Each is unique and each is an integral part of the community. To say such thugs about them is shallow and misled. They are a real family with real problems, just like the rest of us. It is unfortunate they must live it all in front of an often vicious public public. I pray for them and ask for many blessings for each child. I have very much enjoyed watching them grow

    • molly444 6 months ago

      Lori,

      You know this family is "remarkable" just from watching television??? I won't say anymore, but I think you need to use your brain! Everything on television is fictional or at the very least made to look much better than it really is.

    • ruth 5 months ago

      The duggars always bad mouth small family they think that parents of small family should have more children. Duggar send me email saying that I should have more children but i can't have any more children because my dr told me that if i have any more children i could die my sisters in law are in same boat as me

    • Lina 4 months ago

      Lori, did you by chance miss the "recent" news that the oldest Duggar child molested 4 of his sisters, the youngest of which was only 5 years old at the time?

      We are finally starting to see the cracks. What can and does happen with fundamentalist "parents" of massive families. I'm not happy to be seeing the fallout (I mainly feel sorry for the girls in that family), but perhaps all these things we're learning about their oldest child will help folks realize that these people are NOT who they claim to be on tv.

    • kim 3 months ago

      Good article, also read thishttp ://www.indiaparenting.com/raising-children/124_6582/are-you-inculcating-arrogance-in-your-child.html

    Click to Rate This Article