Sue Radford, baby 21 is here..

[FortuneFrimble]

Daily Fail story here
21 babies! That's some achievement. I cannot believe her body is still in one piece. I feel sorry for those kids though. There's absolutely no way they can all have the individual attention they need growing up. Four kids maybe, perhaps 6 at an absolute push but 21 seems like collecting trophies for a hobby to me. It'd be interesting to see what families those children decide to have when the time comes. It seems like she's putting her own want for babies ahead of her existing children's wellbeing & that isn't healthy. I'm curious that she's practically guaranteed herself an endless supply of babies as her children have children. But they're supposedly paying for everything themselves so we're not allowed to say anything against them. I don't agree with it. Tell me I'm being U.

Yes of course plenty of people don’t use contraception and obviously it’s not a crime??

I just meant in relation to the fact the Radfords are making a big point yet again about their baby being the last and how they are definitely finished having children. If you’re not actually doing anything to prevent a pregnancy then it’s a ridiculous thing to say.

“what a ridiculous thin to say! Even a class teacher would know most of these things after only 6 hours a day with 30 children. And remember that are not 21 little children. Some of them are adults!”

Well, it’s probably fairly easy not to have a favourite activity when there’s no time as a family for external activities. But with 21 children, even with a few of them not at school, when is there time to help with reading, work through some fractions, help navigate through conflictual friendships etc.

You’ve inadvertently hit the nail on the head to say that most teachers would get to know their students by spending 6 hours a day with their pupils. The point being that teachers don’t also need to wash their students’ clothes, look after babies and toddlers and cook their food.

How much time could you realistically spend with your school-age child when you’re:

• packing 16 or so school lunches and bags, overseeing homework, music instruments etc in the morning
• in the afternoon there’ll be bags to help unpack, 16 or so dinners to prepare and clean up afterwards, 16 kids to get to bed. Not to mention newborns and toddlers and their need for constant attention.

Even if all of the domestic work was magically done by domestic fairies each of the 16 or so children could get about 15 minutes of individual attention, if all they did for the 4 hours after school was spend time with their kids and not feed them or tidy up.

If one child was in crisis, who would look after the other 15 or so children and sort out their needs while they had some time with their mum or dad?

(I’m saying 16 kids as I’m assuming a few have left home.)

For mumto2 - There are plenty of references to the blog on line as well as newspaper articles about it that contain comments from Sue.

www.theradfordfamily.co.uk.

@zzzzz no that’s not really a very good answer. It’s a valid point. In fact there details on the blog about 1 child being very poorly and needing a hospital stay. You then have 3 babies/toddlers to care for, 6 Primary age children to get to school even if the secondary And college kids sort themselves. That’s not something anyone can just step into. You’d need to be able to drive a minibus for a start, take 3 babies with you to take 6 to school. It’s not simply what anyone else would do.
Also regarding disability being picked up, the teacher cannot be relied on to do this, they teach the child as one of 30 for around 9 months. The teacher will change every year, and (not judging) assumptions will be made based on the child’s background. My daughter was just thought to be quiet and awkward and if I hadn’t have raised concern her disability and learning difficulties would not have been diagnosed or recognised and yet when she was assessed she scored very highly, she had learned to mask very well (aged 7) so whilst extreme problems and disabilities will stick out to teachers, there are plenty of things that won’t.

What happens when a D&V bug strikes?

Surely each and every child under, say, 6 or 7 (realistically, a bit older) needs (deserves) constant, 1:1 care through the night when this happens?

My almost-13 year old slept with me when he had a sick bug a few months ago. He still can't deal with vomit by himself.

Why are people with/from families of 8 and under trying to compare themselves with the radfords? It’s REALLY not the same.

I wonder if they ever have sex just for enjoyment or if it’s purely to make her next little dolly.

Have they all been single pregnancies or are some of them twins?

How do they even manage to bonk without being interrupted. I rarely manage that with just two

If everyone followed their example in having so large a family then life in the UK would become unsustainable.

What about the costs to the NHS and local education system, let alone the tax credits/ child benefit? I wouldn't imagine the tax from making pies covers all that.

Do those of you frothing about any benefits this family might receive really think a fascist paper like the Fail wouldn't stick the knife in if there was a whiff of benefit fraud?

Precisely where has anyone on this thread suggested benefit fraud, Bluelady?

The fraud lies in all the claims that they are completely self-sufficient and sneering at families that claim benefits: it's their USP, and why papers like the Mail love them. I for one am not in the least bothered about them claiming benefits, what I am bothered about is the fact that they are used as a stick to beat other parents when the reality is that they have received thousands of pounds in benefits over the years.

what a ridiculous thin to say! Even a class teacher would know most of these things after only 6 hours a day with 30 children.

Hollow laughter from parents of learning disabled children who often have to fight for years to get their disabilities recognised, let alone catered for.

Zzzz whilst I find their lifestyle unfathomable, and I don’t necessarily think their decisions have been best for their children, I agree with you entirely on this point:

Why is the state of Mrs Rs genitalia so often brought up? There’s a strange mother-shaming element to the discussion.

People love to shame women whatever they do and whatever they choose. The worst of it is it’s often other women who make these vile remarks.

I think there’s something more behind the vitriol, but I can’t fathom what. I doubt it’s jealousy, from parents who have many children because most can imagine it’s bloody hard work. What is it? Could it be that they just shouldn’t step outside the box? Is it that teenage mothers are supposed to be miserable and regret their life choices to affirm ours?

It's overpopulation, my dear.

I can't be bothered to care about the tax credits or whatever, there's a logical end to all that (that's going to hurt, I imagine). But imagine how many great-granchildren they're going to have?

**“I don’t have 21 children. I have a much smaller family but I think the idea that they wouldn’t know their children or couldn’t recognise any problems those children have is ridiculous.”

Surely this depends on the child though? One of mine tells me everything that’s on her mind, the instant I see her. Another one, however, needs to be around me for a bit, chatting about incidental stuff without distraction from the other kids before the friendship problems or the maths test she was worried about comes out.

I couldn’t find that time in the evenings if I was preparing food for 18 people, bathing 8 primary school aged kids, doing readers and spelling with the primary kids and supervising the homework of the others, changing nappies and wiping the toddlers’ bums, getting the bags reading for school, reading bedtime stories and folding the 9 loads of washing that Sue Radford says she does. Not to mention a newborn and another small baby to look after. She just wouldn’t tell me stuff, maybe she’d tell it to another sibling or maybe she’d just not bother.

People with busy working lives don’t come and need to feed, bath and get 21 children to bed though do they?

Hopefully someone has mentioned this already as I haven’t read the whole thread, but what about the environmental impact of having so many children? What if everyone did it?

It’s totally selfish IMO.

"I think there’s something more behind the vitriol, but I can’t fathom what."

I think you are on the right lines Zzzz and I think I know what that thing is.

On Mumsnet you get a lot of people who are quite heavily bought into a particular brand of parenting that is very involved, high intensity and places a high value on education.

Its a stratergy that origionates in the middle class and the basic plan is to produce small numbers of children and invest in them heavily in the hopes they will become high earners and replicate the privilege that allowed you to make that investment in them in the first place.

The Radfords are doing an extreme version of the opposite stratergy which is to produce larger numbers of children and utilise their labour power for the benefit of the family unit. In this case through housework, assistance in childrearing and by working in the bakery.

I'd hesitate to completely defend the Radfords because, as I say, they are an extreme example and extremes are rarely good.

But what we're seeing over a lot of this thread is people who understand their stratergy for survival as a moral good in itself rather than (more accurately) as an adaptation to the circumstances of being middle class.

This is an old article, but there's loads on a similar track, about this family who are honest about claiming tax credits. They get so much hate and vitriol from all avenues. Their circumstances have changed, I believe, however they were both working part time but that wasn't good enough and they didn't have anything like 21 kids.

This is one of the reasons why I can't stand the Radfords. They are doing exactly the same but protecting their 'brand' by being a bunch of liars.

Just watched the house tour video, her commentary is 'I love this room' I love the high ceilings' 'I love the laundry room', which just has a huge washing machine and 2 baskets. Bunk beds seemed too high, Witt risk of head banged on ceiling

I couldn’t find that time in the evenings if I was preparing food for 18 people, bathing 8 primary school aged kids, doing readers and spelling with the primary kids and supervising the homework of the others, changing nappies and wiping the toddlers’ bums, getting the bags reading for school, reading bedtime stories and folding the 9 loads of washing that Sue Radford says she does

I think they have said they don't do alot of that haven't they?

They certainly don't do homework or reading with the children. And posyerzbjave alreasy said previously said that they have looked at the recipes on the web site and that the quantities of some ingredients are way out. To the point that the amount of meat used woukd not really stretch and portions would be iffy.

There is no way unless they put huge amounts of stuff on the older ones to do that even basics like washing or putting clothes away or bathing get done.

And they don't cope. They can't get anywhwre they need to on time. They laugh about it. Give it a name. Radford time. But when you can't be where you need to be like school. On time. Every day. Then you are not coping.

How many people here, Who aren't sick, or disabled, or have disabled kids, all reasons where you might apply for flexi working, how many healthy capable people have to have their husbands or wives leave their work place every morning just to get the kids to school?

If I called dp and told him to come home and help me take children to school he'd think there was something wrong with me.

I dont give a shit about benefits.

There's nothing you can do about the ages now.

Environment impact well going and force them to care about that either

Putting all these things aside, they are still very selfish and irresponsible. She had a pph last time. They were both warned how dangerous another pregnancy would be.

They went ahead anyway. If god forbid something happens how the hell can anyone be expected to have all the kids together. Whis the care All gonna fall on?

Its a stratergy that origionates in the middle class and the basic plan is to produce small numbers of children and invest in them heavily in the hopes they will become high earners and replicate the privilege that allowed you to make that investment in them in the first place

Or maybe just a commitment to meeting their emotional and physical needs, recognise their talents and nurture them and assist them with their weaknesses?

Thats such a shitty article FairyCaravan
Fwiw that families set up (both parents work pt, top up with tax credits) is exactly the way me and DH live. And its a very rational way to arrange things when children are still little.
If either of us were to increase our hours the tax credit entitlement would likely increase with it to cover the cost of childcare.
I agree think the whole debate around benefits would be much better if everyone felt able to be honest about their circumstances. But the entire subject is so toxic now, its no wonder people feel the need to be cagey.