18 kids and counting C4 tonight (9pm 10/12/2015)

[seasidesally]

new episode shall we have a thread about it ??

Comparing them to the Kardashisns is a bit silly... They're a huge family because they're joint by marriage, and the age gaps between the older children and then the two from the second marriage is quite large... Even so, a very wealthy family with staff and more than the average amount of children doesn't compare to 18 children growing up in 4 bedrooms with only one earner.

I would like to see them during a typical family situation.

older kids at a residential trip and a high school hockey match. dad away taking hos parebts to the airport, and mum has to get the other kids up fed dressed out the door at to schools. on time.

Ffs typos

About homework - state primary schools normally don't give out homework apart from a weekly reading book and some spellings for older children, some more serious homework might start when they are 10-11, but it's the kids' homework, not for parents.

Even with just a reading book though, you'd be looking at at least a couple of hours a night to get through all those younger kids!

I really don't see this as stone throwing at all. It's an extreme situation and the issues regarding individual attention and chaos are completely valid based on what can be seen on the screen.

Out of all the big families shown on TV over the years the Radfords fascinate me the most. The other families are quite frank about the ups and downs of large family life; the children speak honestly about being bullied etc, whereas the Radfords are so sunny and happy and staunchly deny any negatives. The children as well seem so positive about it (although Chloe did seem very concerned about her Mum in the last programme) which is really nice; but I do wonder if they are genuinely happy, or they just don't know anything else.

If anyone remembers the Freer family the Dad had a vasectomy reversal last year and are now blogging and vlogging about their "baby dancing". [vomit]

Mitzy Chloe transferred uni to be closer to the family, she didn't drop out.

I don't think Sue and Noel look alike at all. The first time I saw her on TV I thought she was of Eastern Eurpean jewish descent.

'Overall amazed by the stone throwing on this topic, '

Stone throwing? They deliberately court the media and go public with their lives. 'We're not on benefits', but they take loads in in-work benefits and child benefit.

She has a baby when she was 14 and he was 17, but hey, it's okay now.

On FB last night Chloe Radford put a status up saying she started work at 5.30am and finished making pies at 9pm so no doubt they've had ALOT of orders since the programme aired.

yankee on the very first programme, one of the young boys were interviewed and said that they would not notice if he was not there , they seemed quite bemused about their parents having so many kids. No it is not stone throwing, they court the publicity, so expect people to speak against what is an extreme addiction.

Most people understand that courting the media comes with good and bad, if this family don't comprehend that, then they do have either learning disabilities or a mh issue around denial. They Christian those who question their life, as keyboard warriors.

My 5 year old goes to a state primary and she has a reading book, practice word list and a writing book that she does a page of each evening. It all takes about 40 minutes.

aero I remember him saying that, but he said it so matter of factly, without any sadness so that made me think that he found it normal (which in that case is a bit sad). I would be mortified/hurt if one of mine said something like that, so I can't work out if Sue and Noel take these things on board, or not.

I'm not sure how many children you need to have to qualify as extreme/abnormal , 7+ to 10+ I guess? But I think there would be FAR more families who got carried away making babies if there were more women with such an iron constitution as Sue. Her mentioning that due to her worries she didn't enjoy her 17th and 18th pregnancy as much as the previous ones(for me enjoying pregnancy was an oxymoron) and to be so light on her feet all the way through, and to have a relatively small pregnant belly at 38 weeks is amazing from a biological point of view.
From the large families I personally know, s few with 5 and 7 kids, all the mothers "stopped" because they just started to miscarry all the time or couldn't get pregnant any more. Also most of those I know started much later and breastfed their children, and breastfeeding does often impact on your ability to conceive again, so the kids were more spaced out.
And some of those mothers and fathers did quote the desire to "always have a baby in the family" (because it's this special innocent presence) as explanation as to why they wanted to keep procreating. Which I must say did sound quite wrong to me, as if their older kids were less special (and in those particular families it appeared like they were)

MaryPoppins,
My five year old in year 1 was offered a spelling list to learn, they are planning to have 1 test per half term, and most parents were unhappy about it. I can see from the Christmas card exchange that most children's hand is not sturdy enough, they are struggling to write in principle, we can barely make out most classmates' names!
What if you had twins? Older children in primary school? I can't imagine anyone being disadvantaged in life because they were given less or no formal homework at the age of 5 (or even 10!) compared to others

As for Kardashians, I only know who Kim is(what she looks like), and made the comparison not from the point of view rich/poor etc, but just because it was a quote from someone with many siblings. No idea how many exactly, and whether they were blood or stepsiblings.

Nodowntime - my five year old is in reception, and I was surprised at the homework but now I am seriously impressed, she's reading her books to me by herself after only 8/9 (?) weeks of school and wrote out all her Christmas cards herself... I think there's a lot to be said for doing a lot at home.

libraries by dc stopped reading to me by the end of year two. They were competent readers by that point, as are the majority of children.

Schools obviously vary a lot then Seven At ours even strong readers are asked to read aloud regularly.

I think doing work at home definitely improves children. I read somewhere it should be 40% learnt at school, 60% at home.

No- can't you see how there's a huge advantage. My son is the same age and they have had spelling tests every week since Easter in reception. So they will have learnt to read and spell hundreds of words in comparison. They have to write a diary entry every night and read a book so their vocabulary of reading has to be higher than those having no additional writing and only one book a week. Looking at what they need to know by the end of ks1 ( end of year 2), and Ds knows all of that already after first term in year one, as does most the class.

And - it is recommended you still read to children and listen to them read even when they can read confidently. It boosts them reading clearly as every word has to be read and they can't skim read.

My eldest dc have achieved very highly so far. However they both have a tutor, so they do extra work at home it's just not school homework.
We did still read to our older dc every night Art. Also did sometimes choose to read old. It wasn't every night read aloud school books though so it didn't take much.
Our five youngest are all very close in age I plan to sit them all down together for spellings , reading etc. That's if we send them to school at all. I am quite disillusioned with state education.

Library yes, my four year old has just started reception at a different primary to her older sisters. I am noticing the difference already.
I do think the Radfords have had a hard time on this thread. I am biased as I have a large family. Our dc do get quality time , go to many different activities etc. I couldn't cope with 18 but I do think they seem like a very caring family.

I am sure they are Seven.

My point was just that all of those jobs that take up time with 2, 3, 4 children must be massive with 18. You expect to have dropped some of the 'reading aloud' by the time you have 'teenage homework' to fill the gap. I just don't get how there are enough hours in the day with that many

I'm assuming you have seven Now? Anyway I think that regardless of how many children you have if the parental aspirations are high (which they seem to be for you) where academics are concerned then children will do much better.

I have a friend who is friends with Sue. I have no idea how she has the time/energy to reply as much on social media stuff as she does. If you message her about something you are 99% guaranteed a reply. She always seems "nice".

I do think they need serious therapy. But that really needed to happen when she was perhaps pregnant at 13.

Or support with adoption issues before she even fell pregnant.

When we keep cutting mental health support and funding then people will find their own ways to "cope" - some will be drink/food/drugs...some will have endless babies.

Was she actually pregnant at 13? I remember her saying 14(the first time I watched it, I think it was called 16 and counting), and that it was a huge shock for them. And I always assumed they were the same age, her and her husband, so I thought they were both 14 when she got pregnant?