I watched a special on them once. The only thing more amazing than having seventeen children is that they have seventeen well behaved children (well, 15 then). But then I guess they'd have to be.

I think what made me groan the loudest was that corny bit about giving them all "J" names.

She did that 17 times?? Ouch. I'm cringing here.

To have to go through the teenage years with seventeen kids? Shoot me now.

In other parental news, two more children have been identified by DNA as James Brown's offspring. Six are already acknowledged in his will. Results of the remaining twelve claims are still pending. Well, he felt good....

I think one way they must have dealt with the teenage years is by putting the teenagers to work taking care of household chores and the middle kids.

They would have to. There's no way one woman can give that many kids the kind of attention they need. I assume Dad works outside the home.
I don't see how this family can get by without the older kids doing a lot of the child-rearing.

That's probably true, up to a certain point. I do think that there gets to be a point where there are just too many kids, and I suspect it's a different point for each family. I don't know if this family has reached it or not. They clearly don't think they have, and I guess it would have been on the news if one of the kids had turned out as an axe murderer or something, so it's probably working for them now.

The "older kids doing a lot of the child rearing" happens in families with as few as three children.

Very large families, while mind-boggling today, develop coping strategies and are probably no more neurotic than the rest of us. Possibly less because there is, of necessity, less emphasis on me, me, me.

I'm sure older children, regardless of the number of children in a family, assume some of the child rearing responsibilities in many families. I don't even think it's a bad thing if the parents are aware and not using older kids as surrogate parents. Even some kids who are 'only' children rear themselves, though I don't think that's a good idea. Kids having responsibilities is a positive learning experience. I agree completely that many children from large families are probably well adjusted and happy.

However, the few people I know who reared younger siblings did not have a good experience. They felt used and didn't want children of their own for a quite a long time, if at all, because they felt they had already put in their time child rearing.

Helping out and having responsibilities is different than being expected to raise someone else's child when you didn't make that choice. I suppose it boils down to how the parents handle the needs of the older child balanced against the needs of the younger ones...and against their own needs and choices. When there are seventeen children in a family, I don't see how they would cope without some of the older children having to literally parent younger siblings.

And ALL families are dysfunctional in one way or another. Let's hope most remember to put the 'fun' in dysfunctional. :>)

My brother's mother-in-law is the eldest in a family of fifteen siblings. Their father was a doctor who worked both outside and at home, and their mother took care of them...and also opened the door and showed clients in and all that stuff. My sister-in-law has an uncle who is three years younger than she is!

I know the fifteen of them and they are all wonderful, normal, compassionate, entertaining people. I suspect that the perception we nowadays have of the kind of "attention" that a growing child needs is somehow changed.

not something I'd want to do with my body!

Of course! Neither for money nor for world peace or anything ! :-)