JasmineFire said:[quote]

xplnyrslf said:

From Health Encyclopedia:

"Prolapse of the uterus Prevention;There are a number of things you can do to reduce the risk of a prolapsed uterus, or prevent a mild prolapse from worsening:

regular pelvic floor exercises one of the most effective things you can do,lose weight if you are overweight and maintain a healthy weight, avoid constipation and straining by eating a high-fibre diet, and avoid heavy lifting."

From webmd, a great source:
http://www.webmd.com/urin...ic-muscles

Kegels are for urinary incontinence primarily.
[Edited 5/9/08 21:40pm]

KatSkrizzle said:

I'm only as good as my resources, and I post where the info can be found.
Working in a teaching hospital helps, because I learn what online info is reliable and credible from the residents and attending physicians.

xplnyrslf said:

xplnyrslf said:

wow.. that's serious

Imagine the carbon footprint these people produce! The average American family already creates an unforgivable amount of waste, but 19(soon to be 20) people?

Oh yeah, that's exactly what God wants, for you to fuck up his planet with your ginormous freak family.

I've seen some of the shows and specials on these people. I tried to have an open mind about it. I really did. But then I learned a little more about the Quiverfull movement and there's just no way I could see this as a good thing.

I think if you really must have more than 2 or 3 kids, you should adopt. It's no cheaper than biological children, but at least you're taking in existing kids rather than adding to the population.

meow85 said:

they have to cook with 3 stoves

ZombieKitten said:

And according to that msnbc article they've got 9 vehicles -including a freaking bus!

The Lord works in mysterious ways.

meow85 said:

I agree.

meow85 said:

And who are we to say how many kids people should have? Although 19 is somewhat excessive

LleeLlee said:

I agree, to an extent. But, when you're on TV already for the number of children you've had, having more becomes dubious -- are you doing it for the notoriety?

ThreadBare said:

Sad to say, I think this woman and her husband are doing it for this purpose. It's like they want to be in the Guiness World Book of Records for having the most kids (if they're not in already in that book).

LleeLlee said:

I'm all for telling people how many kids they can have, intelligence tests before being allowed to procreate or vote, the banning of cigarettes and alcohol, a four-day work week, elimination of censorship, a world uniform, the rejection of currency in favour of a bartering system, enforced castration (male and female), the banning of fiction, and mandating that La-Z-boys be the only type of home furnishing permissible.

The amount of kids people would be allowed to have would be one (but only after thorough DNA testing).

psychodelicide said:

they wont be... there's a Spanish woman where i live.. she literally had 20 kids with her husband and she's not on tv.. so, i really didnt see why they were on tv

Flowerz said:

20 kids, holy crap!!!! This couple on TV seems to be looking for recognition of some kind for having so many kids. If so, then that's the wrong reason to have so many kids to begin with.

roodboi said:

That image was the first thing that popped into my head...jeez, 18 kids would be such a pain in the ass

ThreadBare said:

Yeah But, many would be defending a woman's right to strip or be a sex worker, basically to use her body however she chooses to use it. If this woman wants to exercise the same right over her body but chooses to have kids instead, to criticise her is a double standard. However, I can see the point of some people that having 18 kids is definitely irresponsible as a productive member of society unless you can afford them and devote enough love and attention to them, and with 18 you cannot. I would never have 18 kids, but she does have the right to have them if they can afford them.


.
[Edited 5/10/08 7:18am]

LleeLlee said:

Entirely different kettle of fish.

Ace said:

Oh Ace, you would so love China. I like the bartering system proposal, and the uniform thing. The rest is the insane mutterings of a mysterious and handsome recluse .. :HowardHughes:

psychodelicide said:

I can thinking of easier things she could have been recognised for rather than giving birth :painfulashell: how about knitting the worlds biggest slippers or baking a cake so big that you need a passport to eat it!

LleeLlee said:

Sure, she has the right to multiply as much as she wants. In an age when kids cost A TON of money and when most of society has moved away from an agrarian lifestyle and they're on TV, it's suspect.

Not questioning whether she has the right. I'm questioning whether it's responsible and the right thing to do.

ThreadBare said:

I dont think its responsible.

Just wondering if they PAY for them alone or they get help from public funds

Isn't it just that they don't believe in birth control or abortion so every time she can get pregnant she does and then has the kid?

LleeLlee said:

I can imagine that giving birth would be very painful. I'm not a mom, but I know that raising kids is not easy either. Of course, a woman has the right to have as many kids as she chooses. But I don't think willingly having 18 kids is a responsible thing to do. It's one thing to love kids, but to have that many just seems to be a bit abnormal.
[Edited 5/10/08 8:55am]

LleeLlee said:

Definitely not.

mdiver said:

That's what I'm wondering.

JustErin said:

You just hit the nail on the head.

JustErin said:

That was the case with my grandmother (Italian Catholic) and she and my grandfather had a farm in Italy (this was in the 1920s) and a home here and traveled back and forth between the two - I guess they wanted enough kids for both homes.
The first four children died because of illness contracted by travel. So I never knew them as my aunts and uncles like I have the other nine.

My cousin had been pregnant as many times
as her... I haven't kept up with how many she has though.
She loves kids so much that she now works in pediatrics.

Personally, I like lots of kids,
but with that many, I think that one can easily be neglected.
I don't know, maybe those parents got it all under control.

LleeLlee said:

The western world already consumes more resources than it's ready or willing to replace. Barring any change to more sustainable lifestyles -something most people in North America seem pretty resistant to -the only other option is to limit our family sizes. I think we should put a cap on biological children. You think you need more? You can foster or adopt. Or hell, maybe folks could skip the blood-spawn altogether and just adopt kids rather than adding to an already overburdened population.

Simply put, any more than a limited number of offspring is ecologically irresponsible. It's not just a matter of whether or not the individual parents can afford numerous kids like this couple apparently can, but whether or not our planet can afford it.