The Dugger family may be unorthodox but in many ways they represent a family, like any healthy family, that values love above all else. I work with teenagers who are in the foster care system. They have been tossed from family to family so many times they can't remember all of the homes they have lived in. All of them have been physically and sexually abused and all of them have experienced severe environmental neglect. For these teens, the Dugger family must look like a paradise. 18 kids might not be ideal but all in all the Dugger children are getting what they need while many other families offer zero love to thier children. We have become obsessed as a society with being a perfect parent when so many kids just want a parent period. Kids are amazingly resiliant and we understimate thier capacity as human beings by suggesting that having to share Mommy time will leave them forever resentful or unappreciative of thier family. Whether they decide to have large families of thier own or not, chances are they will be happy, adapatable adults. I personally think 18 kids is crazy, but hey those are 18 kids that won't be thrown into the system. Michelle seems to love all of her children and even if she can't demonstrate this in a perfect mother/child relationship, I suspect her kids are well aware that they are loved. For most kids thats enough.

You speculate that the older children in large families might tend to have fewer children because they felt overburdened with caring for their younger siblings while growing up. I can only assert that this was not the case in my family.

My father grew up as the fifteenth of seventeen children (there was an eighteenth child who died as an infant). Because his siblings enjoyed being part of a large family so much, they had large families themselves; I have eighty cousins. NONE of my cousins on that side of the family are singletons. Two of my aunts are nuns, so that means the average family size in the second generation is over 5 kids. One of my aunts, the oldest one who got married, had 12.

I think that in your speculation about Joshua, the oldest Duggar, the important question is what his new wife thinks of his family. The decision of how many children to have is something that the wife has more influence on than the husband, for obvious reasons. The women in my family who grew up in a large family were more likely to want to have large families themselves, while the women in my family who married into the large family were more likely to have fewer (in our family that means 4 or 5). Since the girls (especially in the era when my aunts grew up) would have been charged with the childcare, the fact that the women in my family overwhelmingly chose to replicate their birth family is a strong sign that they did not feel neglected or resentful because of their large family and the responsibilities they had because of it.

I am the oldest daughter of seven children; I hope to have four myself someday.

On another note, some of the things you say here might have almost offensive implications, ie., because I had a lot of siblings, I wasn't loved enough by my parents. Love isn't finite like that; it expands to fit as many people as it needs to. Caring for younger siblings isn't a burden. It's all in your attitude.

I have not heard of this family, but must admit that I read about them with a kind of keen fasination. I can well imagine that their TV show have people tuning in.
As the mother of one child I find it inconceivable to imagine how any mother could mother 18 children. Well in fact even be pregnant and give birth 18 times.
I would wonder why they are having so many children and what their real motive and reason is for it.
One would have to be careful that it wasn't a selfish motive, because the parents wanted to.
All our children really want and need from us is our time and I wonder how you can give time to 18 children. I have no doubt at all that they aren't all loved equally, but parenting is hard work and there is a need to be: firm, clear and consistent....how can you do this with so many children?

I've noticed a couple things watching the show "John and Kate Plus 8." In one episode, the parents commented that sometimes the older twins don't get their homework done because the parents don't have time to check in on it. On another episode the older twins were given music lessons and the mother commented that until that point, the older girls weren't allowed to do any extracurricular activities because it would be too difficult to schedule. Talk about the potential for resentful older children! When the kids' education and exposure is at risk, it seems highly likely!

The Dugger kids may not be getting as much attention as they would if they were an only child but I see 18 children growing up to be each others best friends...people they can trust...their mom home schools them...how many women have a child and then before they turn 6months old they are at a day care?! Is that the quality of life we desire for our children...the dugger kids play the violin or the piano...their parents have exposed them to music and arts and not just washing and cleaning after the young siblings. What is wrong with teaching the older kids how to do chores? Isn't that a huge advantage in learning how to be self-sufficient? I bet they have time to play and have fun family outtings but maybe not enough time to laze around like I am sure their mother does not either. I say there is much to be learnt from the duggars whose daughters will perhaps not own a coach bag or a pair of uggs and whose sons will not have the PSPs but they will know that family is important , that God is the head of the house and that life is full of responsibilities!

As an only child and a mother of five who has watched the show about the Duggars and viewed their website, I feel that there is such a thing as overkill. While I would not recommend having only one child to anyone, too many is not good either. Their lives are ordered and structured but, there should be more room for creativity and individuality. Michelle is the mother and she should not put the burden of care for the younger ones on the older ones. They should be discovering themselves, not carrying the responsibility for a child that is not theirs. I realize that what they do is part of their religious beliefs but, some things can go too far. If she were to become ill for an extended period or, God forbid, she became terminally ill, she would be leaving all of those children without a mother and the burden of caring for them on her husband. A family is not a machine and I don't believe it should run like one. Spontaneity makes life interesting. It would be almost impossible to just wake up one morning and decide to go to the park or take a drive or many other things. In a family that big, it all requires pre-planning.

Also, there is the question of individual time. I know with five, it was/is difficult to make sure everyone is getting everything they need. Not to mention soccer practice, t-ball practice, clarinet lessons, etc.. which apparently, the Duggar children have no involvement in and this I find unfair to the kids.

The Duggars might not receive direct financial assistance from the government, but they do claim their home as a church for the tax benefits... this may qualify as an indirect "payment."

All religious superstition is brainwashing. It is narrowing the ability for the children to be able to cope with normal society. In the eyes of the Duggars, they have the solution... for they have purchased a large-enough piece of land... intending for a compound-like housing cluster for each child.

This is nuts to talk about. I came from a family consisting of mom, dad, and two older brothers. I was practically an only child by age 8, I love my parents, but I got little attention. Most of my friends growing up had only 1 sibling, I remember having 1 out of the whole group that had a very close relationship with at least one parent, most sent us kids out to play-even in teenage years and most parents had little to do with their kids period. No special outings like the Duggars get ( and I'm not advocating their lifestyle-but apparently it is the right one for them). My husband came from a loving home, but his mom worked, he said what he missed out on in terms of that absence was bad in his opinion (I work and we have a daughter-she constantly tells me "I miss you so much, and screams yay when I don't go to work b/c I am off) The Duggars aren't perfect, but I'd say ideal in the sense they teach their children responsibilities (wish mine had-didn't even have to make my bed-hard to learn new habits now) and they devote quality family time with their children (my fondest memories-which are few-were when all of my family went on special outings-maybe 3/4 in our lifetime).
Honestly, there are very, very few people I know who truly care for the 1-2 they have. Most scream/nag or are negative like the ones presented on Supernanny, many children are lonely, no wonder drugs are so prevalent.
My comment-God Bless the Duggars-You Rock!!

Interestingly enough one simple thought so many mothers and fathers underestimate the importance of bonding from the time of conception until the main age of formitive development age 3 (not to say influence does not happen past that age) the duggars seem to really utilize that bonding period with each child so as to have the ability to just influence and grow the relationship between parent and child. Their religious beliefs which they seem to really show the example and pass on to the children really help the children to understand they are loved endlessly , are fearfully and wonderfully made. The confidence and identity this creates is why they will not feel empty , put upon, and alone.

I grew up in a family of seven and though I love all my siblings, there is no way I'm going to do this to my own kids. Due to her burden, my mother was always preoccupied, tired, and simply not not available for more then the basics. I would have preferred more one-on-one time, more individual activities...big families only work when they're run like boarding schools, and certainly indoctrination with religious dogma will make management easier, too. But don't tell me it's possible to raise 18 free, independently thinking kids who can develop their personalities. I don't know about those girls, but when I was fifteen I would have had to be kept far from the surrounding world to agree to wearing such clothes. I can't help but think that the kids are paying for the parents' ego trip and look forward to a child's autobiography later on. I might be wrong, but in addition it just looks too oppressive. I would assume that these kids have different personalities and preferences, too. And now they're all with the same hairdo, all with the same clothes, all names with J..., even home-schooled, hence under absolute parental control...that might make sense during times of disaster, but why create such a situation on purpose?

You brought up many intersting points and observations--home schooling, same clothes, etc. Thank you for adding to the discussion.

I occasionally read about the Duggars with fascinated horror. It seems to me the parents are naively involved in a game of 'who can acquire the most' . . . only it's not toys but kids. It has become a contest. How can this possibly be about what is best for each child? And as someone else commented, how can these children individuate when they grow up in a crowd where everything is rote? I cringe thinking of all those little boys who can't possibly be getting enough contact with a parent to feel like they matter. Yes, it is better than foster care and abuse, but I would bet a large number of those kids will (do) bear signs of neglect and low self-esteem. It's not about them as individuals, it's about an image the parents are determined to maintain. If Michelle really wants all those kids, then turn the babies over to the big girls to enjoy, and pay attention to all those young boys who need to cuddle on a mother's lap.

As someone who has taken graduate-level courses in child psychology and who watches the Duggars' TV program regularly, I was struck by one particular incident that occurred on the episode where the family visits New York City. At one point in this episode, 4-year-old Jackson gets lost at the airport. No one notices he is missing until an airport security employee makes an announcement over the loudspeaker about how they've found a little boy named Jackson. Even then, it's a member of the Discovery network's TV crew who first hears the annoucement, not a member of the Duggar family.

But the part that really made me sit up and take notice was after Jackson came back to his family, he was shown sitting on his 19-year-old sister's lap, clinging to her and crying. It turns out that this sister, Jana, is his "buddy", the one who takes care of him on a daily basis. The whole incident made me think of the attachment parenting theories I had studied in school. I wondered who is little Jackson more attached to-- his mother or his sister? Of course, this was only one incident, but it still looked to me that when times got tough for this little guy and he needed someone to comfort him, Jana was the one he wanted.

If Jackson really has bonded with Jana the way a child typically bonds with a mother or father, how does this affect both of these children's futures? Won't Jackson feel abandoned if Jana leaves home to get married or go to college? Or is Jana so attached to her little brother that she won't want to leave him?

I find it alarming that some people seem to think that so long as a kid is loved, fed, and not abused, that's all that is required of a parent. For pity's sakes people, these are CHILDREN, not dogs. I for one don't feel like giving a kid the bare minimum they need to survive and not abusing them = good parenting.

Anyone who's seen the show can see the Duggars truly love their children and are trying to do right by them.

But they AREN'T trying to raise children so much as they're raising a cult. I liked this article, but disagree with the author that this is a smaller issue than individual attention.

The Duggars PRIDE themselves of keeping their kids sheltered from all outside influences and information. They monitor their children's reading, tv watching and internet use- but by their own admission this is not just for inappropriate content, it is to make sure their kids aren't exposed to "outside influences" i.e.: any point of view other than Michelle and Jim Bob's. They brag about how they ONLY allow their children to be friends with families that are just like theirs- and that is intolerance, no matter which way you slice it. Not allowing your kids to associate with anyone who isn't EXACTLY like you is bigotry, no matter how nice you are about it. Their kids all dress the same, act the same, talk the same, and have the exact same ideologies. I see absolutely no individuality what so ever in any of these kids. This family is a well oiled machine in which every little Duggar acts and thinks and behaves like every other little Duggar.

I believe they truly are, for the most part, a happy family- but I mean, we'd ALL be happy if our parents kept us completely disconnected from the outside (i.e. REAL) world except on chaperoned field trips in which we were closely monitored.

The scariest thing to me is that all these Duggars will become VOTING Duggars, and they won't be voting based on how the real world works, only on what Mama and Papa have drilled into them to be true.

"All your children are poor unfortunate victims of the lies that you believe." -Frank Zappa

The Duggars instill a very strong religious orientation that denigrates self to the service of others (JOY-Jesus first, then Others, then Yourself). By making self-interest a "bad" thing, they ensure the children see their obligations and responsibilities as a necessary part of being a "good" person. Weekly "confessionals" with Mom and Dad further reinforce the belief that subservience is best.

Further, a religious belief that disallows any contact between opposite sexes until marriage (other than handholding) pretty much ensures early entry into marriage. How many young adults are willing to forgo nearly all physical contact with other people for years to pursue higher education or professional training? Would the Duggar parents support their children if they sought a college education away from the home? When the show first aired, several of the children expressed an interest in careers that require degrees, but those all seem to have been swept away now.

As for the "compound" idea, I think that came from a comment made by Jim-Bob in one of the early shows about purchasing a large piece of property so that each of the children could have a piece of land for a home when they grew up and got married. Maybe not quite a compound, but certainly a strong statement about his expectations.

Whether there is a rebellious Duggar hiding amidst those matching clothes and happy faces remains to be seen. The oldest is only 20, so the next few years will be interesting, as the kids become adults and face decisions about what they will do and what they will become.

A couple of interesting points - On a shopping outing, one of the older girls mentions how much everyone always wants to go, to "get out of the house." And why is it that they vehemently reject birth control, but accept birth assistance (c-sections). If God is choosing the size of the family, perhaps it is his will to make those babies breech. Why don't they accept that?

You cant keep children locked up in a cage. I can see shielding them from bad things but not culture. I beleive thats what folks mean by shielding. And you still cant shield them from the bad things 100 percent. There is a such thing as too much control.(This can happen in smaller families too.) You dont want their best friends to be hydrolic chambers, 8 year olds, and chimps like a certain celebrity. Another thing I find ironic whith the Duggars and others like them is they preach Quiverufll but there are still above 18 living at home( except Josh).How can you carry on the beliefs when 18-20 yr olds still live at home?

And another thing I have observed those like the Duggars that their life decisions are based on resources available to them. The Duggars look happy because they can provide for this many. Most are not well-off like them. Michele Duggar doesnt have to work outside the home but othe women dont have the option thus limiting family size. As the article mentioned on smaller families it costs more to raise children and tighter adoption rules. I conlcuded If everyone practiced this philosophy of a dozen kids or more you are asking for poverty due to lack of resources to support them down the road . Thats a dangerous thing about these strange beliefs.

I simply think they have indoctrinated their children into their denomination and their practice of the Quiverfull movement (learned from wikipedia).

I have more to say, but I'll simply leave it as that.