Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Telly addicts

Related: Film discussion forum.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

21 kids and counting

765 replies

thannyflaps · 03/01/2019 22:00

Just watching the latest episode - how on earth do they afford to run that household? iPhones for the kids, holidays to Spain for 20 people, a new kitchen.

There is no way a bakery would generate that much money. Would channel 4 really pay that well for their participation in the programme?

Thanny Flaps

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
KylieJennersTopLip · 08/01/2019 01:04

They've gone back on what they said already.

Someone said "I’m sure your followers has gone up 🙂 more than a good reason to keep us updated 😉
I’m Guna start a petition lol
Who wants the vlogs back???
Like and share lol xx"

Someone else said "have they stopped doing them now"

The Radfords replied "No not stopped just really busy.
We’ll be back soon"

HelenaDove · 08/01/2019 01:06

Noel did mention benefits again in this latest show Its mentioned upthread.

Calvinsmam · 08/01/2019 01:07

Yes 3k a month isn't a lot for 21 children but they decided to have 21 children..

But the children didn’t decide to be born. Child benefit is for children.

PollyFlinderz · 08/01/2019 05:18

The Radfords replied "No not stopped just really busy.
We’ll be back soon"

I think it could be their way of letting it all just fade away whilst saving face.

70sbaubles · 08/01/2019 06:45

Tax credits were never counted as a benefit before UC.
Quite rich people claimed them.
Hell, people on here were paying extra into their pensions so they could claim tax credits. They've never been a benefit for the poor, that's why they could say they never received benefits.
The 'poor poor children' comments are awful. Go and sort your own families out-or are you perfect?

Hubanmao · 08/01/2019 06:59

The are they/aren’t they chat about the technicalities of whether they claim benefits is just a diversion from the real issue though: ie that a 13 year old girl was made pregnant by a 17 year old. And that they’ve continued to have baby after baby, off loading them onto the older kids to provide care. And that they parade the kids on national tv when they’re not old enough to understand or give consent.

Those are the far more significant issues.

Aeroflotgirl · 08/01/2019 08:14

I totally agree Hubanmao, the benefits issue is a red herring, what they are doing is very selfish and irresponsible, and the issue of her being underage by an almost adult boy when she fell pregnant is an issue, and throws up many points of discussion. At 13, a 4 year age gap is a lot!

Aeroflotgirl · 08/01/2019 08:16

They want to portray this wholesome family image, but really one questions why a 17 year old was with a 13 year old child. When you thrust yourself in the media spotlight, it will drag up the negatives as well, that is what you have to realise.

SaturdayNext · 08/01/2019 08:29

But 3K for a family of 21 doesn't sound like much to me.

That's not really the point. The point is that they constantly bang on about being self-sufficient and not claiming benefits, it's what has made them attractive to the likes of the Mail up to now. That point would be valid whether they are getting £3K or £300.

AlaskanOilBaron · 08/01/2019 08:38

Tax credits were never counted as a benefit before UC.
Quite rich people claimed them.
Hell, people on here were paying extra into their pensions so they could claim tax credits.

And then the British public decided that it was perverse to have made benefit recipients of even 'quite rich' people and voted Labour out of power.

potatoscone · 08/01/2019 08:40

Tax credits were never counted as a benefit before UC

Never counted as a benefit by who?

Of course tax credits are a benefit. They always have been. The difference is they are not an out of work benefit so people who claim them don't like to be tarred with the same brush. But let's not pretend, tax credits have always been a benefit.

PlumpSyrianHamster · 08/01/2019 08:42

I'll never understand why a 'family' founded on a 13-year-old getting pregnant to a 17-year-old are lauded in any way for reproducing en masse. There's no way that magic pie shop has been keeping them all going with no benefits at all for all these years.

mydogisthebest · 08/01/2019 09:21

AlittleCrisp, so £3k a month doesn't sound much to you! That's benefits though paid out to them just because they chose to have so many children.

The earnings from the bakery could never have supported that many so they should not have had that many.

They have been claiming benefits for around 30 years now. I wonder how much that adds up to? Add to that the huge amount they have cost this country in births, other medical costs, dental costs, schooling etc.

As I have said before if we all decided to be that selfish and stupid the country would be on its knees

ILoveMaxiBondi · 08/01/2019 09:32

Where the bloody hell are social services??? There are not enough adults (or kids aged 18+) to that amount of kids. There just isn't? 🤷🏼‍♀️

Well it’s not a nursery. There are no adult:child ratios for families!

TheLazyDuchess · 08/01/2019 09:40

3k a month over 5 years is £180,000! Say they got closer 1k a month before then, for 10 years, that's still £300,000 in 15 years. And could be a lot more if they got more than 1k a month from 2004-2014. And then the 15 years before that...

AlaskanOilBaron · 08/01/2019 09:48

As I have said before if we all decided to be that selfish and stupid the country would be on its knees

Yes. While there's very few people who have any interest in having 21 children, there's a growing movement of people having one or no children at all because of the very pressing state of environmental affairs.

www.nytimes.com/2018/02/05/climate/climate-change-children.html

To reproduce so thoughtlessly, with that moronic giggle about the heating not working or whatever, is an absolute travesty.

MinorRSole · 08/01/2019 09:55

They wouldn't have got anywhere near that 15 plus years ago. When I had my eldest (18) we were on the breadline, times were tough and we got next to nothing but even then it was a surprise to get anything at all.

I do agree that there is a significant cost of living/average wage gap and the government have filled this gap for a long time. The living wage is long overdue and they need to keep pushing that up at the same time as building more social housing to bring the property market to order!

So in essence I agree with tax credits, they are an unfortunate necessity for a great many families. However there is a certain amount of having to cut your cloth accordingly. I agree with the 2 children cap, it's fair - I say that as a mother of 4.

I do agree that her age is a real concern and definitely think that publicising the family and hailing them as some sort of super parent team is worrying. The fact remains that he was above the age of consent and her well below it. A child can not legally consent and that makes it rape. Whether it is (legally) because he wasn't yet 18 I don't know but it is deeply disturbing on a moral level. I'm sure I read that she was 7 when they met so impossible to know when their relationship started.

I hope she's happy and ok but how sad that she had nobody to look out for her as a vulnerable young child.

Mummylife2018 · 08/01/2019 10:09

@ILoveMaxiBondi Well there bloody should be!!!!!

Mummylife2018 · 08/01/2019 10:10

Why do you think adult:child ratios exist in Nurseries?!?!

Mummylife2018 · 08/01/2019 10:12

@potatoscone I was NOT replying to anything! When I said caps I meant Caps lock - capital letters!!!!!! 🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️

Mummylife2018 · 08/01/2019 10:14

I said "this is because", as I was following on from my previous sentence, which I had accidentally typed in capital letters!

• Nothing to do with anything 'upthread'
• I was not quoting anybody

Do you understand now?! 🤨🤣

evaperonspoodle · 08/01/2019 10:24

Minor I remember on one of those Underage and Pregnant episodes there was a girl who was 13 and the boy 18 or very close to it. Her mother said she was horrified, and the police and SS came to visit when it was discovered she was pregnant. It was entirely up to the mum to decide whether or not to press charges and she decided not to as they were still together and she was worried that it would jeopardize her relationship with her daughter and grandchild.

Sue and Noel met when she was 7 and moved to the area (or he moved to her area) as he was friends with her brother. It's very possible that her parents were not aware they were in a relationship, let alone having sex. Apparently the family GP advised Sue's mum not to keep them apart (maybe that was her gut reaction) as they would rebel further. Sue's dad joked on the program that he 'might have thrown a few bricks at him' when he discovered she was pregnant.

Obviously we don't know the family dynamics when she was at home, but I really don't think it was a case that her parents were not looking out for her. Until now they seem to be a very instrumental part of both her and her children's lives.

potatoscone · 08/01/2019 10:27

Yes I know what caps is.

At 22.18 you said... Also, they get £3.5k per WEEK in Child Benefit and child tax credits

At 23.32 you repeated (accidentally in caps)..... THEY GET £3.5k PER WEEK IN CHILD BENEFIT & TAX CREDITS!!!!! And followed it with....
This is because the majority of the children were born before the 3 children limit came in....which looked like you were repeating (quoting) and the answering your own post from 22.18.

Not sure why you have posted a bunch of emojis, rather than use words to convey what you are trying to say.

MinorRSole · 08/01/2019 10:33

@evaperonspoodle there was me thinking I had read they both grew up in care. Guess it goes to show that it's easy to get the wrong end of the stick with these things.

I've got a 14 year old myself, I can't even begin to imagine her being a mother - she doesn't even feed her own rabbit!

I do find it very sad that she was so young, regardless of what support she did or didn't have at the time she was still a child.

evaperonspoodle · 08/01/2019 10:37

Yes she was a child and it is sad. I find Sue in particular to have a very child like aspect to her now so I cannot imagine what she was like at 13.

Swipe left for the next trending thread