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

[seasidesally]

new episode shall we have a thread about it ??

Nope, they were not the same. He was 17 and she was 14 when their first was born.

As for homework - our 5 year old reads and writes, but I find that her writing deteriorated massively "thanks" to the school pushing phonics, to start with she accepted that a lot of words you just have to memorise to know how to spell, then she switched to spelling everything phonetically, and then again switched to trying to guess the correct spelling and making up words like 'onleigh'(=only) and worse!
We read to her a lot, and she's got extremely good visual memory, and was interested in reading. However I just feel if a 5(6,7,8's) year old's interests and talents lie elsewhere, to consistently push massive (for their age) amounts of homework on them is more likely to put them off reading/writing etc.. I am just uncomfortable with lots of formal homework for such little kids, I think the 60%(more actually) of learning does happen at home, but not primarily through homework. Mostly through parents/family interacting with the children.

Expat,

I just decided to be most and googled them, here www.theradfordfamily.co.uk/meet-the-family/, and if you click on the picture it comes up with info, a bit dated, but dates of birth would obviously stand! And it says his year of birth is 1970, and hers 75! There is no month of birth, but even if he's the end of the year and she is the beginning, there's still more than 4 years between them, potentially 5 +, so he might even have been 19 when he got her pregnant
Water under the bridge now, but still a bit eww. Who knows, maybe it's him who has been the driving force at having babies non stop and she is the second fiddle?

Not most, nosy! Stupid phone!

It's very telling they only specify Sue's age, creepy really.

He was 17, it was mentioned in earlier episodes.

Seven, how could it be if on what I assume is their own website/blog his year of birth is given as 1970, and hers 1975?. Probably the TV producers wanted to embellish the truth, so that not cause a furore. To be fair, they could have not provided his age on the website at all, it's not like they themselves are hiding it.

I think there is something pathologically askew when a woman wants needs that many kids.

I think the 5 dogs prove that they can't just have one or two of anything.

I noticed that they didn't even adress the dogs being walked.

sue doesn't even take the kids to school so how do the dogs get walked.

five sets of vaccinations neutering chipping insurance etc

no way those dogs are properly cared for. I doubt she can even get them to teh vets if noel has to leave work to take the kids anywhere.

if she had 18 cats everyone would agree there was a problem. nut kidd are always seen as some kind of personal choice. but what does number 18 bring that 17 before didn't.

what happens when there's a hospital stay with a preemie. no way would they be allowed to take the other kids to see them or that all 18 would be well enough to enter a nicu ward. they are seriously pushing their luck with nature and they don't see a problem. with any thing.

I was horrified about the 5 dogs to be honest. In the show one of the kids was squirting his bottle (of juice it seemed) over the dog and everyone was running riot. I would be concerned about the younger childrens' safety with 5 dogs in such a busy house. People say they know their dogs, but with that amount of chaos it wouldn't be surprising if a dog snapped.

I also read on pinkoddy that Sue has a cabinet of Radley handbags that she collects. They are "too good to touch" therefore for show purposes only. It adds to the hoarding/collecting tendencies she seems to have.

Yes I was also shocked at the juice thing.

why when you struggle to watch the chikdren you'd add a dog or five into the mix I don't know.

they are playing with fire. the older ones have enough responsibility without having to keep babies and dogs separate.

I have a 13 year old. The thought of her having sex at this age is horrifying; if it was a 17/18 year old I would have him charged and then murder him myself I wonder how they would react if their 13 year old Millie? got pregnant.

'I wonder how they would react if their 13 year old Millie? got pregnant.'

They'd probably be happy. They were happy when their teenage (18 is still a teenager) daughter got pregnant.

Tbh they seem to have no ambition for their daughters over helping in the bakery and having babies so they probably wouldn't find it that sad!

But how could you talk to your children about the age of consent when you yourself were breaking the law, and are totally unrepentant about it? In Sue's wedding pictures she looked so young (I think she was 17?) so at 13 I can't imagine how she looked. She certainly didn't look like a "mature" 17 year old, she was very child like.

Another of the families on a previous program (The Freer's) their own children have had children very young too and they are delighted about it. It is just so sad that producing babies in your mid teens warrants such a positive reaction. Fair enough it has worked out for Sue and Noel but when I think about their ages when she got pregnant (it was a shock for them as Sue said they were being careful, so it doesn't seem like a one off encounter, they were sexually active for some time) it taints my view of them. I don't know why the media presents them in such a glowing light.

I wonder why he wasn't prosecuted at the time??

There will be no fostering for them surely, due to his age when he impregnated a child.

I wonder why, too. My cousin was 16 (the age of consent there is 17) when she became pregnant via a 21-year-old man and her mother didn't seek to prosecute them. In fact, she gave her permission for my cousin to marry the guy. They did marry. Are still together, 21 years later. But they only had one other child, when she was in her 20s.

Sue said that her family GP told her parents not to keep her and Noel apart. Presumably they chose not to prosecute.

Would anyone let them foster anyway? Don't they need their own room? Fat chance there!

If I was ss looking to assess them, I would wonder what else they were hiding, they hide his age when he impregnated Sue, they hide the TC, what other secrets are they hiding?

I'm not saying in any way that this family are like the Duggars, but the clear issues in that family were ignored for the sake of making a cheap TV programme, and the same is happening here. They have issues which are being ignored while they are being patted on the back.

They have become very cagey regarding finances in the last few years. They have a FAQ on their blog where members of the public can ask questions, which they never fully address (especially where money is concerned)

Q. How much is your electricity bill? I pay £200 and only have 3 kids

A. We pay no where near that amount, despite running an industrial washer/drier 9 times a day. Try switching off lights when you leave a room, that will really help.

I would love a MN live webchat with Q and A session with them.

NoDownTime because Sue was 13 when she became pregnant he was 17.

There's no way they pay less than that in electricity. She's at home all day! (And I guarantee the TV is on all day!)