To ask your view on the Radfords?

[Emlou07]

Sat with my morning coffee watching 20 kids and counting. Listening to my two children fighting over a toy, wondering how on earth that many children can get enough/equal love and attention?!

(I know it’s none of ‘our’ business how many children people have.. but when you put yourself out there, obviously people will have an opinion)

There probably are worse families out there but this particular family makes the choice to put themselves and their children in the public eye thus opening themselves up for criticism.

Er fuck right off with your criticism of mums whose babies have different dads. Babies are conceived through sex. Whether you have 1 or 100 dads so long as the kids are cared for it is totally irrelevant. Urgh

A friend has six kids, we went away with her and her DH. All I can say is there were a LOT of near misses with their younger ones with safety issues like being near the pool/wandering off etc. But their DM and DF seemed v blasé about it all.

I think as soon as the baby can move they want another newborn. I think they both need counselling to address their abandonment issues. It doesn't always work to let children raise children. The older girls are raising the children. My heart broke for the girl who had escaped to college and was now working in the pie shop. She seemed so angry and sad.

Birdsgottafly she's only 42 now..this wasn't the 60s

Large families (though not this large) have until recently been pretty normal in Ireland. And I've always felt sorry for the older kids (particularly the girls) whose childhood's are eaten up with looking after their younger siblings.

My best friend in primary school was from a family of fourteen, she was one of the younger ones. And I think it was clear the negative impact it had on her. There was a lot of attention seeking and drama - she clearly felt the need to work hard for other people's focus.

I have 6 children and I worry that sometimes i expect too much from the older ones
Ie : child 1 ( in her teens ) help child 5 put her shoes on etc ( never do they babysit or do Bed time ,bath time routines ) and I often say to my husband let's remember we chose to Have kids not our children, but I only have 6 I can not imagine in any world ,those older children have been able to grow up naturally , how they probably are raised to be responsible but at what cost, all children deserve to Have a child hood.
I also raise my eye brow at the fact she was a child when having the first, I wonder why there's been no issue with his age and how he got away with it.
I also wonder if her childhood is some how missing something and that's why she has so many , i my self had a some what disruptive childhood , dad died young, my mum went off the rails and I recently been aware that maybe I am Trying to Create something I long for .

Sorry for any spelling issues on my
Mobile.

Of the large catholic families I know - the view about whether its a good or bad thing seems to depend on where you are in the family. Older siblings tend to resent it and proclaim that they want to avoid it themselves whereas the young ones love it and want to recreate it!

My view is that she must be the champion of pelvic floor exercises if she's still walking without peeing her pants after 20 kids.

I have one kid who is 2 months old and my pelvic floor is still not recovered, and that's with the daily pelvic floor exercises!

I don't want to judge them but part of me can't help it, 20 kids, for me, is just too much. I'd be worried that each child wouldn't get enough one on one time with a parent (a older sibling isn't the same) and that there would be silent competition for the parents attention. Most kids say they wish they didn't have siblings at some point, or that they don't think they get enough attention BUT these kids seem so downtrodden when the talk about it.

Another point... Points to them for even considering sex with 20 kids (where do they find the time or privacy?!)

I'm re-watching the classic Coronation Street from 1987. Jenny (14) is being encouraged to date Martin (18) by all the Adults around her including Step mum Rita

I went out with a 19 year old when I was 14. There was no sex. He knew I was underage and never tried anything. Lots of my friends went out with older lads without sleeping with them. I think lots of girls today have sex underage with boys the same age and get more pressure from those boys than we did.
It was different times and unlike today's 15 year olds, we didn't look older than we were.

I haven't watched the most recent one. I would like to have a "live and let live" attitude to them - it's not for me, and although I would like another baby, It's never going to happen and I will always just have the one - but DH is one of 7 and as a middle child said that although his family was relatively close, it was a loud and chaotic environment, and he felt that he was always treated as one of the younger kids even though his youngest brother is 10 years younger, so even at 14 he wasn't included with his older brothers and sisters as he wasn't quite an adult, but didn't have his own identity as the oldest teen.

I would imagine that in the Radford family, the dynamic is even more pronounced because there are so many younger children, so at what point do they tip into their own identities rather than being one of a gang of little ones?

i think it is hard, although i imagine their needs are met on a basic level, clothes, food bed etc they cant be allowed to follow individual paths very easily can they? Imagine paying for all the kids to do Karate/rugby/football/gymnastics/ballet/swimming etc. I know not everyone takes their children to activities but i think it would be a case of 'sorry you may really want to go to dance but we cant afford activities for 20 of you'.

f@'sorry you may really want to go to dance but we cant afford activities for 20 of you'

You do realise there are families with two kids who can't afford activities for their kids?

My grandmother (born in the late 1920's) was the eldest of 15, her mother one of 19.
It's not that long ago that large families were the norm, I know that know we have contraception and lower infant mortality there isn't the need to have a large family - but people managed then, so if they choose to do it now I think that is their business.

I think it is odd, and I do find them a bit creepy, but each to their own really. I occasionally watch out of curiosity.

Oh and to those that think the C4 pay them a fortune - they don't, they aren't allowed to. I am sure they attract sponsorship outside of the show, but the show will only pay a relatively small fee and expenses.

Their house always seems more like a badly run nursery than a family home it's constantly chaotic! The kids are well looked after in the physical sense but I don't believe that they can adequately give all 20 kids the love and attention individually that they deserve. the youngests ones obviously are given all the attention and the older ones are being made to look after them and trying to get any little bit of peace and quiet they can while begging for their parents to quit having babies.

Whenever I think of the Radfords I'm reminded of my DM telling me about her childhood - she was one of 14, born in the early 50s. She told me her mum wasn't affectionate with the older kids because she just didn't have time, she would have at least one toddler and and a newborn plus all the housework etc and once she got to around 8 she was expected to help out with the younger ones and do school runs and food shopping. I wonder how different it is today for very large families

Imagine paying for all the kids to do Karate/rugby/football/gymnastics/ballet/swimming etc. I know not everyone takes their children to activities but i think it would be a case of 'sorry you may really want to go to dance but we cant afford activities for 20 of you'

I agree. We didn't hear any of that. Unless they just didn't show it on the programme nobody seems to do anything like that. Though could they afford to devote the necessary time and/or money, if even one child showed talent or promise in music/sport/arts? I doubt it.

I can’t get beyond the fact he abused a child.

Also - Large families like this have never been the norm, of my grandparents (all born in the 1930’s), two were from families with 4 children, one was one with 6 and the other was one of 10 with 9 surviving childhood.

Previous generations (family trees have been done) seemed to have had anything from 3-10 children, obviously not all lived to adulthood but it’s inaccurate to say that families of 20 were normal, in the 20th century, outside of the poorest, most religious families. They were not.

You do realise there are families with two kids who can't afford activities for their kids?

It's not just money though, they just couldn't devote the necessary time, as I said in previous post, if one child showed talent in music/sports/arts. It is possible (though not easy) to access training in these areas with little money. Gymnastics for one child is four days a week, not including competitions. The Radfords couldn't do that.

Do the older ones go to the library when they want to do homework or revise? Or maybe stay at school to do it. I can't imagine them being able to concentrate at home

My grandad was one of 16, they were a farming family. Some kids died young which I imagine wasn't unusual for the time, 2 died in ww2. It was more normal then but from what I've been told individual kids didn't get much attention, older girls were expected to look after younger ones and boys expected to help out. Obviously this was in the 30's/40's so a different time but none of the children had more than 4 kids if they had kids at all, which makes me think that growing up in a large family definitely impacts you no matter how loving it seems.

Cricketqueen - similar to my Grandfather who was one of 12 and from a farming family. None of the 12 had more than 3-4 kids, a couple had none. He was the second youngest so didn't suffer the burden of looking after his siblings. His older sister had no choice and they all left home as soon as they could. Even if they had wanted to stay there was no space for them.

I was one of two children and there was little or no sibling love. Many of my friends and classmates were from much larger families, the largest being 17 children. It seemed to me that if you had many siblings you could fall out with some but not all so you would always have a friend among siblings.
I had hoped to have many children but it just was not possible.

I just had a quick look on their website (massively out of date by about 3 babies) Anyway I looked at each childs profile and they all list PE or Football etc as their favourite subjects (apart from the tiny ones obvs) and hobbies are things like playing with my siblings or xbox. One poor lad had done that his ambition was to work in the pie shop. It's probably just as well that they don't seem to be particularly academically (or otherwise) ambitious. I'm fainting about having the possibly of two going through Uni

It's not just money though, they just couldn't devote the necessary time, as I said in previous post

Oh,..and parents working full time/long hours with two children can devote enough time to them?
Ideally, all parents shower love, time and atttention on all their children however many they have , but in the real world, many parents can't.
It may be nicer for a child to have lots of siblings when they see little of their parents.
Should we judge parents who only have one child, for not providing siblings for that child?
Sorry, but it seems on here that if people don't conform to what you (in general,...not you specifically) do or understand, then they are wrong.
I bet that your children will find something to criticise about the way you brought them up, however you do it.