The Radfords

[highchairhell]

Hey all, after a night struggling with a teething baby and a toddler with chicken pox I ended up thinking about how the radfords cope? There just wasn't enough of me last night to give both the constant attention they wanted, and my DH was helping but it was constant and exhausting.

How on Earth do the radfords cope? Surely their children teeth, get poorly, need advice, homework help, feeding, bathing, one on one time etc so HOW?

I guess my aibu is to think they can't? Surely they can't be in 21 places at once?!

But for children who are siblings to share the same heartbreak, is, to me, not right. They have not felt the movements, they don't have the same attachment a mother does. IMO it is disappointment, as opposed to grief, for a child. The grief is the parents'.

Pink I am sorry for your losses, but I do agree with onequestion on this sensitive matter. My DM suffered a late miscarriage when I was around 10, and I was very upset by it, but my sadness really wasn't for me. I remember being conscious more of not misbehaving afterwards. But personally, I was disappointed that I wasn't getting a sister, not grieving the antenatal death of my sibling. Children aren't equipped with the emotional capacity to fully suffer the effects of pregnancy loss, unless the magnitude of the situation is spelled out to them- which in my opinion is very wrong to do. I felt more sad for my Mum than anything else. My younger DBro was 6 or 7 at the time, and after he was told by our DGP what had happened, he just "Oh", and asked if he could he go out and play with his friends. I'm not even sure if he would remember now if asked.
It certainly didn't impede on our mental health to the point we needed bereavement counselling - and thank goodness it didn't.
Children should be sheltered from unnecessary pain where possible, life is full of enough as it is.

Lots of siblings hold their brother or sister and attend the funeral. I have 5 living DC and they were all affected by it. I don't think grief should be shut away or hidden. Saying that I was probably naive of it myself before it happened to me. It's quite upsetting to be told by those who haven't been through it how we should act and how it will affect our kids.

Sorry for your experience Pink, I agree you do what you think when it happens but I agree that some, very emotional things should be kept away from children and I don't think I'd have thought to involve my children in that way-but I'm quite closed about my emotions anyway. I've lost 2 babies albeit not that late, but my children weren't even aware of it and till aren't. Yet I know other mums who refer to each loss with their children as though they are 'real'-i.e. proper born children. To me it was disappointing but not a loss. Obviously that wasn't as traumatic as yours. My perspective wasn't meant to upset you.

Yet I know other mums who refer to each loss with their children as though they are 'real'-i.e. proper born children.

Christ! Are you trying to upset people? I've not lost any children during pregnancy but can see that to imply they are not real or as proper as children that were born is really offensive. Dying before they are born doesn't make them any less real or any less of a child.

I didn't mean it offensively-worded badly. Sorry. What I meant was that they see MC babies as the same as born babies, whereas others don't make that link and see it as pregnancy loss. I wasn't being nasty. Please don't make it into something it wasn't.

Lots of babies born after about 16 weeks are fully formed small babies not a heavy period.. One actually gives birth and babies can survive from 22 or 23 weeks in some cases. At what point are they considered 'born children ' if they manage to survive. Do they suddenly matter at a set number of weeks?

I know other mums who refer to each loss with their children as though they are 'real'-i.e. proper born children

Having lost a pregnancy at four months I can assure you that she was very real, she was fully formed with tiny fingers and toes, eyes, a mouth. She has a name and I don't think of her constantly but she is always there, tucked away in my memories. She was just as real as any other baby and I think your comments, intentional or not, are very offensive.

No Pink.
I am referring to how people THINK about those babies , not the actual fact of if they were born or how they were passed. How people think is also how they use language-babies, foetuses, embryos, rainbow babies, and so on. Everybody uses different terms. I also don't think they suddenly matter at any point-like the way people grieve, that is highly subjective.
My opinion wasn't to offend you-your experience was awful. I never minimised that at all. I was referring to sharing grief with children-and saying I felt it should be hidden to an extent. I have not said that late MC isn't distressing-my posts have been taken out of context. I am not going to repeat what I said again or argue that I have minimised people's experiences because I genuinely didn't intend to.
However I stand by the fact I don't think an 11 year old should be so distressed at a mother losing an unborn baby, it isn't fair. My 11 year old would, like a poster above, literally go 'oh' and be disappointed for a while, because that is how I would frame the situation, and how I have previously involved him in my pregnancies. I don't see my losses as the same as my children. Obviously, I've not been through your scenario and I am sorry for your loss.

I didn't use the term 'real' in a way so as not to suggest people's babies aren't real. At all. It has been taken out of the context of the post. I said it to differentiate from others who don't see losses in the same way to non-lost babies.
I'm going to leave the thread now because my point has been blurred and I'm not wanting to offend people by explaining further.

I think it's a safety issue - even with though the older ones are basically parenting (I understand the older boys don't - what a great example) I can't believe it's possible to watch that many children at any one time.

I also think the children can't be getting enough sleep!

As a PP said, in a few years we will be reading books about the family and what it was like to grow up as one of 21.

As someone who has lost a baby at full term I cannot comprehend how anyone could 'protect' their children from the effects of that pain. I went to hospital with all of the ecitment of a baby sister coming into the world, and came home with nothing but memories in a little box. It is offensive to the love I have for all of my children to assume my grief be so small I could have shielded anyone from it. I was a complete and utter wreck.

I sought help from Child Bereavment UK who advised that it is actually healthier for children to see you being open with your grief, that seeing you go through the toughest of times and coming out the other end back to some sort of new normal will help them when they have their own problems in life.

Please unless you have actually suffered a loss late on don't assume you can put yourselves in our shoes. I never in my life could have comprehended that pain and desperation until I was there.

My first child was stillborn at full term. I’m not going to enter into debate about the previous posts which I feel were hurtful to anyone experiencing this devastating loss.

However I do agree that it is not right for the other Radford children to feel they have to do things for their brother Alfie for their mums comfort. I would not want to put that sort of pressure on my living children and while I encourage them to ask about our forever baby and commemorate milestones, it is not for them to take the burden of my grief.

If anything the other Radford siblings are in need of comfort and time and space to talk about their feelings which isn’t going to be doable in their house. So you have a whole house full of children who have to face - on the surface - the excitement of a new pregnancy every year, while keeping their worries and anxieties inside about the possibility they’ll never get to meet their new sibling, and having to keep a brace face on and comfort their mum in her grief.

I wonder if they have ever considered the risk to her with so many pregnancies? With each one she has I can’t help hoping that she survives this labour. She may not be perfect, her reasons to have so many children may be questionable, but she’s still their mummy.

badgers and melody

They have 5 adults in the house, that’s how they manage

She’s been told she’s high risk and has had major complications in the past but she doesn’t seem to care about the risks.

to all of you who have lost little ones.

Chloe definitely seems to be anxious about Sue's health, she did say a few shows ago that she felt Sue should stop for her health. I remember when the last one (or maybe one before last?) was born she wrote on FB 'you can't imagine how relieved I am that this little one is safely here' I did feel sorry for her as she seems to be highly aware of the risks each pregnancy brings.

I'm surprised no midwife or doctor has advised her to stop, I was told by a consultant very firmly that they strongly recommend I do not attempt any further pregnancies. He did say they can't dictate and they can't force me to stop but he did spell out very clearly and starkly exactly what I would be risking and that if he was allowed to say "do NOT" then he would be saying "do NOT".

She either has been told something similar and is ignoring the advice, has a medical team so lax that they're not warning her of the risks, or is a medical miracle and suffers no long-term after effects of soany pregnancies in such a relatively short space of time (one every 12-18 months roughly?). My money is on the first option and that she is ignoring medical advice related to the risks. The biggest risk with so many pregnancies is that the womb doesn't contract properly after the placenta is delivered to slow the bleeding from where it was attached so there is a high chance of haemorrhage and also a high chance that drugs to make the womb contract won't work.

Sues parents also want her to stop, they’ve said it in past.

There are definitely a lot of risks. And I believe from the programs etc she goes in for induction a bit early as she's had fast labours. So she's often in for a few days and then there's so many other children to care for whilst she's not there. Aside from the fact he got her pregnant at 13 whilst he was a legal adult, I can't help thinking Noel should start to put her health and the children first and either abstain or use contraception.
I know people have commented that each baby is a family affair but the bits I've seen a number of the children are definitely not that impressed and why is teaching them that a new baby every year is the best thing that can happen?
Even Eamonn Holmes touched on it, calling him a 'randy goat' and discussing what he'd put Sue through.,.

DH went in for a vasectomy so that if either of us does get broody at any point in the future we can't let hearts rule over heads as it simply isn't an option. We don't plan to ever reach a point of 'ah, fuck it, how risky could it really be!?" but it's good to know we're protected if we do. I'm glad DH took my health seriously enough to step up and do it, I did offer to get my tubes tied but it's a riskier surgery with more change of complications and a higher failure rate so he took the responsibility.

DHs dad did the same in the 1970s for same reason.

In regards to the bereavement I would have welcomed the opportunity to 'do things' for my dead sibling and be involved with the grief.

In our house it was never talked about. My sibling was still born at at almost full term after an internal examination broke the placenta away by accident I think.

I went from a very small child at home excitedly waiting for my sibling to come home to one who's Mum didn't come home for months (intensive care not expected to last till morning and then weeks in hospital followed by a couple of months in a mental health unit as the hospital even took away their rights to a funeral from them.
My Dad was forced to work as his boss wouldn't give him time off and they had a mortgage and me to feed and so I was sent to relatives with no idea what was going on and basically three of my family went to the hospital and no one came home for months and I didn't understand why.

It was only as I got older I was told and tbh I'm having some counselling now for mental health issues many which stem from all that.

I certainly don't respect them and I do judge them. If that makes me a nasty person then so be it - I can live with it.

I think they are totally and utterly selfish. They only care about their want or need for another baby who as soon as it becomes a toddler they palm off on the older girls to have another baby.

They don't care that much about their existing children. If they did they wouldn't have had so many nor agree to go on reality shows. They don't care about Sue's health. They don't care that the planet is already overpopulated. They definitely don't care that they have cost the NHS, the education system and the taxpayers a fortune.

I don't know whether they claim tax credits now or not (although I think they probably do) but they have definitely in the past. They also have claimed child benefit for 30 YEARS now. How much in child benefit alone have they had?

It's a shame that after x amount of children you don't have to pay the medical costs yourself. That would stop stupid couples like this.

There is no way on earth those children get quality time with mum or dad. I bet they don't know the favourite colour, food, tv programme, book (if they even get to read books), singer etc of each child.

The risk of conditions like Downs Syndrome increases with age. I wonder if this has anything to do with Sue's announcement - I don't know how far along Sue is in her pregnancy, and at what point in pregnancy that could be detected.
I hope all is well, for the sake of everyone involved.