Duggars are NOT Quiverfull! - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-17-2011, 03:09 PM
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,029
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by treeoflife3 View Post
what does bathing with your babies have to do with nursing?  Did I not nurse my kid right because I rarely ever bathed with her?  I mean, she's still nursing past her second birthday... but we didn't start routinely bathing together til she could be in a shower with me.  Is it pointless to bathe with a formula fed baby?  where does bathing factor into correctly nursing?



I *think* the point from the earlier poster regarding bathing with baby is that there are certain practices, commonly grouped under "ecological breastfeeding" that generally result in a later return of AF and babies naturally spaced several years apart.  Some people argue that if you are going to simply accept how many children "G-d wants" you to have, you should go with what your body biologically would do.  It is not a matter of nursing your kid "right" or "wrong".  For me, it's kind of like when you say the term "how long did you exclusively breastfeed?" and some people mean only breastmilk, others mean no formula, others mean breastmilk & water...  One isn't better or worse, they're just different and it helps if you have some idea what people are talking about, kwim.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie View Post

According to their first book-- although if one is unwilling to accept the Duggars' own words that they aren't Quiverfull, than I expect one also would assume they were lying about this as well- up until a few babies ago, she breastfed despite being in excruciating pain (she described nursing with tears running down her face) and even so, her fertility returned around 6 months, at which point her supply would dip and she would get pregnant again. I used to believe the internet rumor about weaning purposely to get pregnant as well, but since I'm assuming telling the truth is just as much a part of their moral code as women not wearing pants, I'll take her word on it.
 


Thanks for the info.  I was obviously misinformed.  It's not a big thing in my life, so I didn't go looking for additional information. 

 

I do agree with a previous poster, though, that in our society even nursing for "only" 6 months is something to be proud of! 

 


 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-17-2011, 04:50 PM
 
treeoflife3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: tennessee/kentucky
Posts: 1,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

okay, but what does bathing have to do with it?  is it because you are skin to skin (which would be the 'cuddling naked' bit she mentioned) or is it because then even while being washed, baby can nurse (which would be the 'pacifying at the breast' bit that was mentioned.)  or does actually being in soap and water together actually have anything to do with nursing?  I'm not getting how bathing with your baby has anything at all to do with nursing.  My baby was bathed in a baby tub and she never desired to nurse while she was being bathed and we had plenty of skin on skin contact outside of her actually being washed... but because we didn't bathe together does that mean I didn't nurse 'naturally?'  what does bathing WITH your baby have to do with nursing at all?

treeoflife3 is offline  
Old 06-17-2011, 04:53 PM
 
annettemarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the Restricted Section
Posts: 34,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by treeoflife3 View Post

okay, but what does bathing have to do with it?  is it because you are skin to skin (which would be the 'cuddling naked' bit she mentioned) or is it because then even while being washed, baby can nurse (which would be the 'pacifying at the breast' bit that was mentioned.)  or does actually being in soap and water together actually have anything to do with nursing?  I'm not getting how bathing with your baby has anything at all to do with nursing.  My baby was bathed in a baby tub and she never desired to nurse while she was being bathed and we had plenty of skin on skin contact outside of her actually being washed... but because we didn't bathe together does that mean I didn't nurse 'naturally?'  what does bathing WITH your baby have to do with nursing at all?


It has noting to do with it. It's not even one of the steps in the ecological breastfeeding book.

Flowers, fairies, gardens, and rainbows-- Seasons of Joy: 10 weeks of crafts, handwork, painting, coloring, circle time, fairy tales, and more!
Check out the blog for family fun, homeschooling, books, simple living, and 6 fabulous children, including twin toddlers

annettemarie is offline  
Old 06-17-2011, 09:17 PM
 
littleplum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 88
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

How can you tell if you have your "period" at 4-6 weeks post partum?  I still had lochia at six weeks.

littleplum is offline  
Old 06-18-2011, 07:27 AM
 
Irishmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with heartmama
Posts: 45,457
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by littleplum View Post

How can you tell if you have your "period" at 4-6 weeks post partum?  I still had lochia at six weeks.


I didn't have my "period" at 4 weeks. I had my period at 4 weeks. No quotes needed. And it was because my lochia had stopped the week before, and when I started bleeding again (my period), I spoke with my midwife. And because at 8 weeks pp I got a period. And 12 weeks. And 16 weeks. See where this is going?

Yes, I'm still bitter I didn't get months of period free living. lol.gif
Irishmommy is offline  
Old 06-18-2011, 11:00 AM
 
littleplum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 88
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Sorry, I put period in quotes because I didn't know that you knew for a fact that you had ovulated.  I primarily have anovulatory cycles, so I have very few periods per year (only one last year, in fact).  And since I'm not currently TTC, I would have no idea if my next bleed is a period or an anovulatory bleed.  So, when I refer to my own times of bleeding, I use quotes around period. 

 

Again, I apologize for the misunderstanding!

 

(And now I'm jealous that you only had three weeks of lochia.)

littleplum is offline  
Old 06-18-2011, 04:58 PM
 
Arduinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 31,187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I'm still trying to figure out why it matters if they are quiverfull or not in the long run anyway?

Arduinna is offline  
Old 06-18-2011, 05:38 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 25,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by littleplum View Post


(And now I'm jealous that you only had three weeks of lochia.)



Me, too...but I still think I got the best of that one. My shortest period-free post-partum time was four months...and I went...hmm...18 months? with dd2. (It was only a few months ago, and I've already forgotten, but it was about 18.) I think I can take the trade-off of 5-8 weeks of lochia!


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
Old 06-18-2011, 06:50 PM
 
frugalmum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)

I remember michelle saying they decided to be open to as many children as god wished to give them... in my book that is quiverful enough, even if not "official."  There's no official membership card for being quiverful.  They may just not want to be identified with the movement, who knows?  I am open to as many children as god will give me but I don't fit into the quiverful mold.  If there were an extreme reason I would use BC but it would have to be a VERY serious issue.

frugalmum is offline  
Old 06-19-2011, 01:49 PM
 
cappuccinosmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SW Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,447
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My guess is that the Duggars, like many of us, do not want to be locked into a box.  Particularly a box that has taken on a very negative and even creepy connotation in the last several years, due to rampant stereotyping.

cappuccinosmom is offline  
Old 06-19-2011, 10:44 PM
 
Viola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 22,549
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)

I think of quiverfull as just a generic term for Christians who don't want to use birth control. I have friends who only use NFP, I think of them as quiverful.  But, yeah, Quiverfull as a named kind of movement, I can see why they'd reject the term.  On the other hand, I get the feeling with the Duggars its more than just about being open to God giving them children.  I don't know why I feel that way, but I feel like they are trying to have as many children as they possibly can for a number of reasons.

 

I went 10 months with no period with my first baby, a baby who nursed quite frequently. I didn't start ovulating until after a year, however.  My second baby went longer between nursings, and I got my period back at 4 months, but I felt like I was ovulating the month before that.  So I don't think that exclusive breastfeeding means you won't get pregnant, but honestly, I did not have the libido after my second pregnancy, so the sex wasn't there.  I've had sex fewer times in the last 2 years than they have children.  I guess they must really like sex and make it a priority in their lives.

Viola is offline  
Old 06-20-2011, 11:52 AM
 
pers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 517
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by blessedwithboys View Post

However, every time this topic comes up I can't help but wonder if Michelle truly practices "natural" nursing.  By that I mean, does she nurse ASAP after birth, does she co-sleep, does she pacify at the breast, does she BW, does she bathe with her babies, does she cuddle naked with them?  I had major struggles with ds1 and got AF back at 5 mos but had fewer issues with ds2 and didn't get it til 11mos.  It took 3-4mos for me to "discover" AP with ds1 but was super-crunchy with ds2 from the get-go.  If Michelle has BF issues to begin with, and then compounds them by doing any type of scheduled feedings (or hands her baby off to a "buddy" throughout the day), it's no wonder she bleeds again so soon.


Bathing and nude cuddling are required now for natural nursing?  Really?  Seems every time I turn around, more requirements are being added.  I know bathing and skin to skin can help with fussy babies who won't nurse, but seriously, how are they requirements?  How are you somehow not really nursing right if you aren't nude and bathing together?

 

In any case, I did do all that with all three kids.  And with my first, my period did stay away for an entire year exactly - lovely present for me on my kid's first birthday gloomy.gif.  But then with my second, I got it back at seven freaking weeks, and I was tandem nursing... omg.  Then with my third, not tandem nursing that time, so just one baby on the boob constantly, and again, back right around seven weeks.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by littleplum View Post

How can you tell if you have your "period" at 4-6 weeks post partum?  I still had lochia at six weeks.



Lochia stopped a little before two weeks for me.  With my second, which was the first time I got my period back early, I thought it probably was a strange late return of lochia (plus a bit of cramping) since I'd heard that could happen.  Then when it happened again four weeks later just the same I was all, really really late return of lochia?  Right?  Because it couldn't possibly be a period already... then four weeks later I was all darn it, because there was absolutely no denying it that time, and thank goodness we'd been using condoms and not relying on breastfeeding.  

pers is online now  
Old 06-26-2011, 05:05 PM - Thread Starter
 
akichan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

WOW!  I haven't logged on in a while so I'm really surprised to see so many posts! I'm mostly with Annettemarie . . . 


Akie, single mom to M (02/18/06), E (08/04/07) and Z (06/22/09)
akichan is offline  
Old 06-26-2011, 05:08 PM - Thread Starter
 
akichan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by cappuccinosmom View Post

My guess is that the Duggars, like many of us, do not want to be locked into a box.  Particularly a box that has taken on a very negative and even creepy connotation in the last several years, due to rampant stereotyping.



Agree. I heard somewhere that being "Quiverful" is TRYING to have as many children as possible so you could raise them as Conservative Christians and basically take over the world. Yikes. Who WOULD want to be associated with that, really?


Akie, single mom to M (02/18/06), E (08/04/07) and Z (06/22/09)
akichan is offline  
Old 06-27-2011, 08:34 PM
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,029
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by akichan View Post

Agree. I heard somewhere that being "Quiverful" is TRYING to have as many children as possible so you could raise them as Conservative Christians and basically take over the world. Yikes. Who WOULD want to be associated with that, really?



Well, the Duggars seem there (actively trying to have as many children as possible) to me.  JMO.

 


 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
Old 06-28-2011, 11:16 PM
 
swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 565
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by blessedwithboys View Post

Disclaimer:  I am a huge Duggar fan and think it's awesome how loving and close they all are and I have no issues with the number of children they have because they actually are able to take care of them, both financially and spiritually.

 

However, every time this topic comes up I can't help but wonder if Michelle truly practices "natural" nursing.  By that I mean, does she nurse ASAP after birth, does she co-sleep, does she pacify at the breast, does she BW, does she bathe with her babies, does she cuddle naked with them?  I had major struggles with ds1 and got AF back at 5 mos but had fewer issues with ds2 and didn't get it til 11mos.  It took 3-4mos for me to "discover" AP with ds1 but was super-crunchy with ds2 from the get-go.  If Michelle has BF issues to begin with, and then compounds them by doing any type of scheduled feedings (or hands her baby off to a "buddy" throughout the day), it's no wonder she bleeds again so soon.

 

And IMNSHO, scheduling (or in any other way interfering with) BF could be viewed as interfering with God's plan just as much as BC.  So then I might go so far as to say that they wouldn't really be allowing as many babies as God wanted to give them; instead, they were artificially creating an environment where more babies would come than if truly natural BF practices were used.

 

It just really sounds to me like she has so many problems nursing that her period comes back sooner than it might otherwise.  I bet if she had smoother sailing at the breast and was able to go to toddlerhood, she would only have a baby every 3 years.

 

Do you mean "ecological breastfeeding"?  I have never read that "bathing with your baby" is necessary for ecological breastfeeding/LAM.
 

 

swede is online now  
Old 06-29-2011, 03:23 AM
 
choli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by frugalmum View Post

I remember michelle saying they decided to be open to as many children as god wished to give them... in my book that is quiverful enough, even if not "official."  There's no official membership card for being quiverful.  They may just not want to be identified with the movement, who knows?  I am open to as many children as god will give me but I don't fit into the quiverful mold.  If there were an extreme reason I would use BC but it would have to be a VERY serious issue.



Quiverful enough for what?

 

choli is offline  
Old 06-29-2011, 06:54 AM
 
mar123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

If my dh and I had sex without b/c everytime I ovulated, we would have had many kids- I am VERY fertile. I am also ALWAYS in the mood when I am ovulating. That may be the case for Michelle- it may not be actively trying to have many kids as possible, but simply following biology. That is the way we are made. (It's also why my dh had a V, also known as the best present he ever gave me, LOL) If Michelle was not as fertile, I don't believe she would have taken measures to get PG. She is simply following the biological nature of her body without any interference at all.

mar123 is offline  
Old 07-01-2011, 07:59 PM
 
MrsSurplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Family Farm
Posts: 372
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by mar123 View Post

If my dh and I had sex without b/c everytime I ovulated, we would have had many kids- I am VERY fertile. I am also ALWAYS in the mood when I am ovulating. That may be the case for Michelle- it may not be actively trying to have many kids as possible, but simply following biology. That is the way we are made. (It's also why my dh had a V, also known as the best present he ever gave me, LOL) If Michelle was not as fertile, I don't believe she would have taken measures to get PG. She is simply following the biological nature of her body without any interference at all.


Absolutely!  3.75 years ago (when I was just shy of 40) DH and I decided that we'd let God determine our family size (a year after #4 was born).  We don't "try" to get pregnant, but we don't try not to.  I have been bed-sharing (with 2 children and a husband) and tandem nursing (on cue) for the past 3 years and we just found out that we are expecting the THIRD baby since that decision was made.  (Did I mention that I'm almost 44 and that I have been nursing at least 2 children for the past 3 years????)  Obviously, we're all different.  In August of 2007 we made that decision.  Next baby was born in May of '08.  Next baby in February of '10.  This one is due in March of 2012.  If we had made that decision years ago - at the ages Michelle and Jim Bob did, I have no reason to believe we wouldn't have been similarly blessed with such a large tribe.  (Well, except that Michelle is infinitely more patient and God-focused than I am...who knows how I would have held up...or if I would have relied on God much sooner than I did to help me through the challenges unique to life with a passle of Littles.)

 

Also, I would not call myself "Quiverfull" because that "camp" frequently has a lot of patriarchal stuff with it that I don't necessarily buy.  And I do know that *some* "Quiverfull" types DO try to have as many babies as possible - but that is not true for most.  For most that I'm aware of (and for DH and I), the idea is that if God is truly in control of your life - if you have submitted all areas to Him -  it makes sense to respect His design for your family size.  That is, we don't try to manipulate our family size either through birth control, Natural Family Planning *OR* through actively seeking to increase fertility (either by early weaning or by medical means, etc...) - we trust that God knows what He's doing (and that He meant it when He said children are a blessing). 
 

 


Mrs. S - Crunchy child of The King, Wife to my best friend, and Mama to my many blessings.

 
 
MrsSurplus is offline  
Old 07-02-2011, 02:24 PM
 
chickabiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)


I'm sorry, I can't get this below the quote.

 

I use NFP (for personal, not religious, reasons).  I've been married over 20 years.  I have one child, by choice.  I will only have one child, again, by my choice.   NFP most definitely does not equal quiverful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viola View Post

 I have friends who only use NFP, I think of them as quiverful.


Carseat-checking (CPST) and WAH mama to a twelve-year-old girl.
chickabiddy is online now  
Old 07-06-2011, 03:40 PM
 
MusicianDad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tuponia
Posts: 8,928
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post


I'm sorry, I can't get this below the quote.

 

I use NFP (for personal, not religious, reasons).  I've been married over 20 years.  I have one child, by choice.  I will only have one child, again, by my choice.   NFP most definitely does not equal quiverful.

yeahthat.gif

NFP is birth control, and an effective one too when it's used properly. Quiverfull couples won't use NFP because they don't consider it leaving pregnancy up to God.
 

 


malesling.GIFMutant Papa to DD (12)hippie.gif and DS (2)babyf.gif, married to DHribbonrainbow.gif
If it looks like I'm trying to pick a fight... I'm not, I'm rarely that obvious.hammer.gif
MusicianDad is offline  
Old 08-17-2011, 12:55 AM
 
brandimn6217's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by blessedwithboys View Post

 

It just really sounds to me like she has so many problems nursing that her period comes back sooner than it might otherwise.  I bet if she had smoother sailing at the breast and was able to go to toddlerhood, she would only have a baby every 3 years.

I never really had any issues nursing, did natural nursing as you call it (I always just called it nursing love.gif) and still my babies are almost exactly 2 yrs apart. AF appeared at about 9ish months. My bff also did all the above and her AF didn't come back til 14ish months but her babies are closer together than mine! I'm not disagreeing with your point but I think 3 yrs is a bit much.  Even in tribal cultures where BF is the only form of BC, most of their children are about 2 years apart. 
 

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by cappuccinosmom View Post

Here's the problem:

There is no credo that one must sign to be quiverfull.  A person who rejects birthcontrol on the basis of their Christian faith is "quiverfull".  But they may not be Quiverfull with a capital Q, depending on what that means to them.  There is no Quiverfull organization to which a person applies for membership.

 

Originally, the term simply meant viewing children as blessings, and not using contraception.  In that sense, the Duggar's certainly are "quiverfull".  So am I.  They have 19, I have 3.

 

Like them, in many contexts I refer not to use that term because other people have taken it and made something it is not.  When people point fingers and say "You are Quiverfull, you horrible person", they have taken that term and put under it a whole laundry list of stuff--prairie muffin, hypocrite, ultra patriarchal, abusive, anti-education, etc, etc, etc.  It is no longer a descriptor of a single belief (rejection of birth control) but an umbrella used to describe a whole mess of beliefs that have nothing to do with birth control.  The Quiverful book, and sites like No Longer Quivering have contributed to this change.

 

Michelle wrote in the book, and elsewhere, that her fertility returns early, and she has to quit nursing due to issues the pregnancies cause with breastfeeding (severe pain and supply issues, iirc).  I'm pretty sure that doesn't constitute "weaning early to get pregnant sooner".  Because bc is ubiquitous in this culture, it seems hard for people to imagine that a couple could have 19 children without interfering with nature.  The Duggar's are unique in their high level of fertility now, but wouldn't have been so 200 years ago.  What sets them apart from highly fertile families back then is that all 19 of their children have survived pregnancy and birth and infancy and early childhood.  Yet and still, Susannah Wesley (mother of Charles and John, writers of hymns and evangelical revivalists way back when) raised a similar number of children, and was a child of an equally large family.  So it happened.


AMEN AND AMEN! Esp not liking to use that term to describe my beliefs about childbearing.  In many ways, I believe that people have taken the wonderful blessing and joy of the quiverful movement and made it either something ugly, abusive and negligent OR the proponents of quiverful have turned it into a dogma.  You HAVE to be quiverful type thing.  If we are turning the bearing of children and acceptance of God's will in having them or not into dogma, into WHO I am, into WHAT and HOW I believe, I are am NOT accepting God's will because I am merely making my children and my fertility into an idol to worship, which, no matter how well-meaning, is unacceptable to God.

 

I used to use the term quiverful to describe myself, though I no longer do so unless I am talking to someone who understands what I mean.  Once I saw that movie that came out a few years ago, I stopped though.  There was the lady from NLQ, I believe in it, another woman who ran a homeschool publishing co with her DH and a lady who had 8 children and a patriarical family.  The woman with the hs co seemed to be very sweet and loving.  The woman with the 8 children honestly scared me.  She was like what I call a femi-nazi.  You know those feminist type women who would rather die than give up feminism, who are angry, who are determined to be as unfeminine as possible?  Those are femi-nazis.  This woman seemed like that about having children.  She was on a mission to change the world into quivering (pun intended) families and there wasn't love and gentleness portrayed about her, though that might admittedly have been editing of the film.  After that, I stopped referring to myself as quiverful.  I also don't refer to myself according to the denominational terms.  What's the point?  We are called to unity and quite honestly, it can and does just become another idol.  

I think we should all applaud Michelle Duggar for standing up to the criticism of the world about following God's plan and call on her life; about living a life with children and joy; for having well spoken, well behaved children in a world that doesn't even use common terms of respect like Mrs. or even Miss anymore; for standing before the gossiping hordes of people who talk about her and her choices and what they believe is the silliness of it and refusing to back down, to cower and be afraid of all that.  Honestly, I admire her and JimBob too.  I admire the children they have raised with life skills and attitudes of honor and dignity in the face of criticism. I admire the fact that they are not refusing more children because of Baby Josie and all those issues.

 

brandimn6217 is offline  
Old 08-17-2011, 08:31 PM
 
SilverFish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Montreal
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brandimn6217 View Post
 The woman with the 8 children honestly scared me.  She was like what I call a femi-nazi.  You know those feminist type women who would rather die than give up feminism, who are angry, who are determined to be as unfeminine as possible?  Those are femi-nazis.  


oh, i thought it was those feminists who rounded up all the men-folk and sent them to Auschwitz...

 

eyesroll.gif

SilverFish is offline  
Old 08-18-2011, 12:33 AM
 
brandimn6217's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

ROTFLMAO.gif

brandimn6217 is offline  
Old 08-19-2011, 04:01 PM
 
lilyka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 17,896
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by mar123 View Post

Evangelical Christians and Baptists are not the same thing. There are many demoninations of the Christian faith. Evangelicals and Baptists are two separate demoninations. And not all Christians practice a specific demonination. Growing up I attended "First Christian Church". That was it. Just Christian.

 

 


Most Baptist are Evangelicals but not all Evangelicals are Baptist.  Evangelical is a broader umbrella protestants gather under.  For example my inlaws are baptist who are Evangelicals.  They attend a lutheran church (well lutheran light) because it is more evangelical than their baptist church but they still consider themselves baptist.

 

Just like all millinialists are protestants but not all protestants are millinialists.  

 


The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it.  We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.

lilyka is offline  
Old 08-19-2011, 04:17 PM
 
lilyka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 17,896
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by treeoflife3 View Post

okay, but what does bathing have to do with it?  is it because you are skin to skin (which would be the 'cuddling naked' bit she mentioned) or is it because then even while being washed, baby can nurse (which would be the 'pacifying at the breast' bit that was mentioned.)  or does actually being in soap and water together actually have anything to do with nursing?  I'm not getting how bathing with your baby has anything at all to do with nursing.  My baby was bathed in a baby tub and she never desired to nurse while she was being bathed and we had plenty of skin on skin contact outside of her actually being washed... but because we didn't bathe together does that mean I didn't nurse 'naturally?'  what does bathing WITH your baby have to do with nursing at all?


nothing.  

 

 

 


The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it.  We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.

lilyka is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 08:09 PM
 
GoldenSeal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I did the natural nursing, bathed with my babies, co sleeping, nursing on demand. I birthed my last three at home and they stayed with me at ALL times. I'm pregnant with baby number 6 in about 6 1/2 years. I breastfed ON DEMAND! Heck! My babies didn't lose any weight after being born (I'm told most lose up to %10 of their weight the first 24hrs after being born) and gained a 1lb a week for the first three months. I would wake my babies up to feed if they slept longer than 4 hours. My AFalways returned 2 months after giving birth. I only bled for 2 weeks after giving birth. I DESPERATELY tried to breastfeed for as long as possible. I wanted to do it for at least a year and I've been close (10 months) but about 3 months after getting pregnant my milk supply dries up for me. 

 

It can and does happen where the breastfeeding alone doesn't keep AF away. My babies got only breast milk . Nipples weren't sore had the nurse come out to make sure they were nursing properly. My body just seems to be extremely fertile. 

GoldenSeal is offline  
Old 03-05-2013, 07:24 AM
 
mamaler0y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Tomball TX
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I know this is a few years old but she has stated in interviews that she starts to give rice cereal at 6 weeks. THAT IS WEANING!!!
mamaler0y is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 04:00 AM
 
VocalMinority's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: surrounded by testosterone
Posts: 1,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by blessedwithboys View Post

...every time this topic comes up I can't help but wonder if Michelle truly practices "natural" nursing.  By that I mean, does she nurse ASAP after birth, does she co-sleep, does she pacify at the breast, does she BW, does she bathe with her babies, does she cuddle naked with them?...  If Michelle has BF issues to begin with, and then compounds them by doing any type of scheduled feedings (or hands her baby off to a "buddy" throughout the day), it's no wonder she bleeds again so soon...

 

I bet if she had smoother sailing at the breast and was able to go to toddlerhood, she would only have a baby every 3 years.

I'm up too early and randomly reading this old post, but I'll be pleased if someone ends up addressing my question anyway.  It does deviate from focusing on the Duggars, but I believe we're not supposed to lift quotes from one thread and put them in another, right?

 

So:  does BF/AP of infants really work this way for everyone, or for most mothers?

 

With my youngest, I did everything blessedwithboys recommends in the 1st part of her post and none of the things that she suggests hasten the return of one's menstrual cycle.*  Yet, my regular cycle returned within a few months, just like it had with my older twins, who were in the NICU for 4 months and whom I couldn't hold much during that time and was never able to BF.  

 

I did BF/AP because it seemed instinctive, not because I'd researched it beforehand or hoped for a specific side-effect.  But I did hear from my midwife that breastfeeding should postpone the need for birth control (or NFP in our case, as we're Catholic).  I was disappointed that it didn't work that way, for me.  Is that really so unusual?

 

______________________

*Unless she strictly means that letting anyone - including husband/dad - ever hold/bond with the baby defeats BF/AP; but surely she doesn't mean that?  I assumed blessedwithboys is talking about regularly having someone else carry/care for a baby for significant stretches between nursing, so she can get things done without wearing the baby.


One woman in a house full of men:  my soul mate:    or... twin sons:(HS seniors) ... step-son:  (a sophomore) ... our little man:   (a first grader) ... and there is another female in the house, after all:  our
VocalMinority is offline  
Old 05-16-2013, 11:20 PM
 
Viola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 22,549
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post


I'm sorry, I can't get this below the quote.

 

I use NFP (for personal, not religious, reasons).  I've been married over 20 years.  I have one child, by choice.  I will only have one child, again, by my choice.   NFP most definitely does not equal quiverful.

 

Oh wow, so this is almost 2 years old, but I never read this response.  To clarify, I know certain Christians who are open to God giving as many children as He wills, but they practice NFP.  NFP doesn't circumvent the will of God as active contraception would, because the possibility is always there--I'm not speaking scientifically.  I know it is possible to have unprotected sex and just not get pregnant because of when you are ovulating and all that.  Now I could argue that since birth control isn't 100% effective, and since God is omnipotent, you are always open to the possibility of God giving your children when you perform a certain type of sex act even if you use contraception.  I've known people who have gotten pregnant while taking oral contraceptives, and even a few weeks after the depo provera shot.  However, I think the idea is that philosophically, your willingness is not compromised by NFP, at least in some religious circles. 

So I know people who I think of as quiverful who do practice NFP, but I know plenty of people who practice NFP who are not quiverful. That's what I was trying to say here. But since quiverful does seem like actively trying to conceive as many children as you can, then my friends would probably not fit.


If I practiced NFP, I would still have to use a barrier method during certain times of the month, because I only want to have sex when I'm ovulating, and I've gotten pregnant having sex 3 days before ovulation, which isn't that unusual. But I know someone who practiced NFP and got pregnant with ovulation that occurred 7 days after intercourse.  That had never happened to her before, but since I wouldn't want to get pregnant at all, and my desire tracks with my fertility, I have never wanted to do straight NFP.  So I don't know if you can be quiverful if you actively decide not to have sex when you want it because pregnancy might result.  I don't know that much about it.  My original thought was just that most people use the term to mean they are open to the possibility of God's will.

Viola is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off