Discover Seattle!

General Category => Discover Seattle! => Topic started by: 49er on Aug 03 07 02:41

Title: 17 is not enough
Post by: 49er on Aug 03 07 02:41
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - It's a girl — again — for the Duggars. [SPAN id=lw_1186153011_0 style="CURSOR: hand; BORDER-BOTTOM: #0066cc 1px dashed"]Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar[/SPAN] welcomed their 17th child, and seventh daughter, into the world Thursday.

  Less than 30 minutes after giving birth, the Duggars already were talking of having more.

 

 [A href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070803/ap_on_fe_st/17_kids"]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070803/ap_on_fe_st/17_kids[/A]

Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: purelife on Aug 03 07 02:44
17 kids!!!!!  Holymolytheymust be RICH!

  i wonder if they have a secret mission to form the bestest sports team evar!  ;)
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Sportsdude on Aug 03 07 02:47
that's nuts. Although they're from Arkansas lol.  
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: JJ on Aug 03 07 03:47
I saw a TV reality show about the Duggar's, it is a very interesting family.  Thats where they get some of the money to support such a large family.  

  Part of the reality show was them building a house big enough for everyone and moving!  
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Schadenfreude on Aug 03 07 04:43
That woman could probably pass a whole watermelon. It would be like jackin off into a trough.
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Lise on Aug 03 07 05:10
Yeah, I did see a bit of their reality TV. It's so weird, having all these children around you. I don't know where they get the $$ to build a family (seeing as she's not working) and they live in a big house that they all built together on a big land.

  I can't even handle two let alone 17. Crazy! Why start popping out babies instead of enjoying them? I think she's addicted to being pregnant on the whole.
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Sportsdude on Aug 03 07 05:19
theirs some truth to that Lise. Some people just like being pregnant.  
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: 49er on Aug 03 07 05:21
 what is a VBAC — or vaginal birth after Caesarean?  

Why both ways required?  
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Lise on Aug 03 07 05:26
49er wrote:
what is a VBAC — or vaginal birth after Caesarean?  

Why both ways required?

 
     Yeah, VBAC stands for Vaginal Birth After Caesarean. In other words, vaginal birth after the mother has had Caesarean surgery. It's riskier because the wound can re-open.

  I'm not sure what you mean by 'why both ways are required'. I do know that doctors generally recommends another Caesarean sugery should the mother become pregnant a second time because of the high risks involved. However, in some cases, mothers do deliver vaginally just because baby has progressed faster than expected.

  Oh er.... I got this... LOL

   [TABLE bgColor=#ffffdd border=1] [TBODY] [TR] [TD align=middle colSpan=2][SMALL]Anti-Spam Bot-Stopper
Please type the text below into this field[/SMALL][/TD][/TR] [TR] [TD align=middle] [STYLE type=text/css]    TD.at_r1 (vertical-align:bottom;)    [/STYLE]  [TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0] [TBODY] [TR] [TD][/TD] [TD class=at_r1 rowSpan=2]ma[/TD] [TD][/TD][/TR] [TR] [TD]cli[/TD] [TD]x[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE][/TD] [TD][INPUT size=10 value=climax name=sauce][/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: 49er on Aug 03 07 05:30
I was thinking Caesarian and vaginal happening in the same birth
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Lise on Aug 03 07 05:33
I don't think that's possible, 49er. It's either one or the other. If the woman progresses fast enough, it's vaginal otherwise it's the other option. You can't have both. I think.
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: PostMonkee @(^_^)@ on Aug 03 07 05:46
(http://www.motleycrow.com/ImageHost/n18500451_30914255_2628.jpg)

[FONT color=#ffffff size=1].[/FONT]
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Sportsdude on Aug 03 07 05:58
I dunno technically if you want to start theorizing it could happen. You have twins. One by c-section and one vaginally. I guess that's possible.
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Lise on Aug 04 07 07:55
PostMonkee @(^_^)@ wrote:
 [img style="WIDTH: 128px; HEIGHT: 137px" height=371 src="http://www.motleycrow.com/ImageHost/n18500451_30914255_2628.jpg" width=204]

[FONT color=#ffffff size=1].[/FONT]

[FONT color=#ffffff size=1][/FONT]

LOL. That's a funny picture, Monkee. That's the family, alright.

  Er... no, SD. It wouldn't make sense to have twins one way or the other. It's gotta be done ONE way. Why put the extra risk on the mother to have both ways? If you're going to do C-Section then pull the two kids out instead of vaginal. [/DIV]
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: 49er on Aug 04 07 08:12
 Heard this on the Tonight Show last night, Jay Leno on the news of the birth of the 17th child, said.........

    Mr Duggar, just like a Republican, does not have pull out plan

  and

  Businesses instead of donating diapers should be donating condoms
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Lil Me on Aug 04 07 12:49
You wonder if they are going to run out of names soon.
 
 Who names their kid Jinger?
   
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Sportsdude on Aug 04 07 01:53
 Lil Me wrote:
You wonder if they are going to run out of names soon.
 
 Who names their kid Jinger?
[hr style="width: 100%; height: 2px;"]

Remember the Walton's tv show? Jinger isn't that bad lol.
   
 
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Lise on Aug 04 07 02:08
Why bother? Just name the kid, Kid No#18.
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: 49er on Aug 04 07 02:18
Has to start off with a J

Here're kids names:

 [DIV align=left]

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Joshua, 19

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]John David, 17

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Janna, 17

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Jill, 16

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Jessa, 14

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Jinger, 13

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Joseph, 12

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Josiah, 11

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Joy-Anna, 9

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Jedidiah, 8

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Jeremiah, 8

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Jason, 7

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]James, 6

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Justin, 4

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Jackson, 3

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Johannah, 2

[DIV align=left fQ6LP="0" sGyWU="0"]Jennifer, new born[/DIV]
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Lise on Aug 04 07 02:32
OMG. J  names!!! Why name all your kids the J-word?? Geez. They're not even given individual identities.

  Meh. I think the mother and father should have their heads examined. I mean, c'mon... enough with the kids already. It isn't fair to them. They all have to compete for their parents attention.
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: JJ on Aug 04 07 02:51
What happens in large families like that is the oldest children end up helping with the parenting of their siblings.  Then when they finally leave home they never want to have children of their own.  If  seen it happen several times.
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: 49er on Aug 04 07 04:00
The guy just taking the saying........keep her pregnant, barefoot and in the kitchen......to a new level
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: P.C. on Aug 04 07 06:04
At least they'd probably get a good rate on monogrammed towels.

  JJ....is that your family ?  [img style="CURSOR: pointer" onclick=url(this.src); src="http://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/more/bigs/c008.gif" border=0]      
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: JJ on Aug 07 07 10:28
P.C. wrote:
 At least they'd probably get a good rate on monogrammed towels.

  JJ....is that your family ?  [img style="CURSOR: pointer" onclick=url(this.src); src="http://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/more/bigs/c008.gif" border=0]

    No, not my family just neighbours that I babysat for.  They ending up with 14 children I believe.  The oldest girl  never had children of her own, I guess she decided she had enough family.  I also know her cousin who came from a larger family and she never had children either.  
 
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: P.C. on Aug 07 07 10:43
Actually, I was referring to the J names....lol

  I can see your point...that might finish off anybody's thoughts of having children.

  Where are you from JJ ?
Title: Re: 17 is not enough
Post by: Sportsdude on Aug 07 07 02:15
saw them on the Today Show. Figures. They're evangelicals. I joked that this is what kind of a family republicans want everyone to have.