Jessa Duggar is pregnant again, 9 months after giving birth to Spurgeon

jessa2

Jessa Duggar and her husband Ben Seewald welcomed their first child, Spurgeon Elliott Seewald, back in November of last year. It was actually a chaotic time in the Duggar family. Jessa was SO MAD that she didn’t get tons of free stuff during her pregnancy, because Josh Duggar’s rampant sketchiness seemingly ruined it for everyone. Then when it came to the birth, Jessa had complications (she was attempting a home birth) and she had to be rushed to the hospital. But all’s well now. Because nine months after giving birth to her first kid, Jessa is knocked up again.

There’s another baby on the way for Jessa (Duggar) Seewald and her husband, Ben.

“We are overjoyed to announce that Spurgeon has a new title in life as ‘big brother!’ ” the couple said in an exclusive statement to PEOPLE. “We are so thankful that God is adding to our family.”

Due in February, the exciting pregnancy news comes as a surprise since the couple (who are already parents to 9-month-old son Spurgeon) have dreamed of adopting since even before their November 2014 wedding. Now with back-to-back babies, the Counting On star, 23, and her husband, 21, can’t wait to become parents for the second time.

They added in their statement that “2017 is shaping up to be a wonderful year already, and we know Spurgeon will do a great job in his new role. Having Spurgeon has been such a wonderful blessing, and we cannot wait to see the face of this sweet new baby (or babies!).”

[From People]

Yes, that was my first thought too: “I thought they were going to adopt?” While I don’t know the rules/laws of adoptions in every state, I would imagine it would be pretty difficult for a 21-year-old and a 23-year-old with barely any income or education to adopt a child. Their income comes from TLC… and from “donations” and “freebies.” Would most states allow them to adopt? Eh. It doesn’t matter at this point. Jessa is living her dream of being a baby-factory.

jessa1

Photos courtesy of Jessa’s social media.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

104 Responses to “Jessa Duggar is pregnant again, 9 months after giving birth to Spurgeon”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. justme says:

    please not these people again. please please please not these people again.

    • gatinha523 says:

      i agree, please stop covering these bigots.

      • Starkiller says:

        By clicking and commenting on their stories, you’re contributing to their coverage. Stop clicking and commenting, and they’ll stop being covered. Supply and demand, pretty simple concept that few seem to grasp for whatever reason.

    • Evie says:

      My thoughts exactly. How much longer is left on their 15 minutes?! How are they still a thing?!

    • JudyK says:

      These people repulse me. Get a damned REAL job and quit having kids in order to make money. Harsh but true. I detest these people.

    • Brandy Armstrong says:

      +1000000000000 lol I can’t stand this family or TLC for their continued (shady) support of them. ugh

    • Betsy says:

      But we clicked. If we want a solution, we have to be part of it!

    • Rayya Kirt says:

      They have to reproduce rapidly or who else will end up taking care of the younger kids. Slave labor is cheap in one house

    • Rayya Kirt says:

      A person here just said to stop clicking on these stories….as they clicked. OK.

  2. Lbliss says:

    How do they afford to have so many kids with no education?

    • Naya says:

      Reality show, paid appearances on the church circuit and fan donations. Then cut costs with hand me down clothes from her family and eventually homeschooling.

    • mayamae says:

      The Duggars are very wealthy when compared to most who follow Gothard and the Quiverfull movement. These people usally live in close to poverty, which (incidentally) keeps their children uneducated and unlikely to do any better. Gothard teaches you can only work for those with similar beliefs, therefore you most likely own your own business. Before hitching onto the Duggar famewhore train, Ben had a windshield repair business so rudimentary he didn’t take credit cards.

      There’s one prominent Gothard family who are grifters who live solely on handouts. They drive around in a small bus with eight or more children and squat in church parking lots while soliciting money for their “ministry”. The children are gaunt, extremely pale, and silent most of the time. The parents are normal to overweight with normal coloring. Most people think they receive the charity out of pity for the children. And since they’re nomads, Children’s Services are never involved. The wife also has a sister with traumatic car accident injuries and now wheelchair bound. This woman was actually on SM as her sister was being cut from the car – her own words. The sister was breastfeeding when she was injured, and the husband insisted the baby only receive donated breast milk. And the bus couple also went on a private vacation – dumping their kids on the disabled sister.

    • pinetree13 says:

      Just wanted to chime in, if you’ve studied this ‘religion’ at all, you’d see that while they clearly have wealth, many of the families practicing this lifestyle live in ABJECT POVERTY! In houses that are in bad need of repairs, and with barely enough food to feed anyone.

      Afterall, they discourage any type of birth control or spacing….even if you’re not rich. Which, even if you weren’t poor to begin with, will quickly send you there without additional resources.

      Oh and child abuse/neglect is RAMPANT. Basically the richer families act as the public face to hide the dark reality of the majority that follow this religion.

      oops! Edited to add I didn’t see Mayamae’s post before making mine but we were thinking along the same vein!

    • Rayya Kirt says:

      No education is why they have 100000 uneducated slave kids

  3. Miss B says:

    “Spurgeon”.

    SMDH.

  4. Lynnie says:

    I’d be interested to see the post-partum depression statistics amongst the Quiverfull set. That is if there are any

    • Naya says:

      Me too. There was the poor lady who is currently serving time for murdering her children when she suffered sever post-partum psychosis. Her husband had been warned against another pregnancy after a previous bout but he took her off her psych meds and her BC because an idle uterus is an offence to their God or something.

      • JenB says:

        I watched a documentary about this not long ago and I remember when it happened. It was so horrible.

      • G says:

        If I remember correctly, the husband in that case re-married and is back to having kids. It’s tragic.
        Lynnie, the site No longer Quivering (if it still exists) might have something?

      • Green Is Good says:

        Maya, that was Andrea Yates. To this day, I believe her religious zealot husband Rusty should share blame. Rusty kept getting her pregnant despite being warned by her doctor that she suffered PPD previously and should not get pregnant again. Rusty KNEW THIS.

      • Dbw says:

        CLEARLY an idle uterus is the devil’s plaything!!!! Some OTHER man’s seed could next in there because we all know, women are jezebels and harlots if you don’t keep them knocked up

        Sigh 🙁

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        I live in Houston, and I remember the Andrea Yates case all too well. I knew the psychiatrists involved because my then-husband is a psychiatrist. I do not know if all the details came out in the documentary, but her first psychiatrist who treated her for PPP after the birth of the fourth child, Eileen Starbranch, was very firm with Rusty and Andrea that she had to seriously drug Andrea to get her back to some degree of functioning. She warned both of them that stopping her medications and getting pregnant again were NOT options. When Andrea developed PPP after the birth of the fifth child, Rusty deliberately took her to a new psychiatric hospital where she was seen by a different psychiatrist, Dr. Saeed, who was initially led to believe that Andrea had never been treated for PPP before. At some point Rusty admitted that Dr. Starbranch had treated Andrea before and Dr. Saeed was able to restart her on the same medication combination that saved her life and sanity the first time. Both Dr. Saeed and Dr. Starbranch were hopping mad when they realized how Rusty was manipulating them, and both warned him AGAIN that Andrea was in no condition to be caring singlehandedly for five children and should NEVER go off her meds again.

        A couple of years later I heard the saddest part of the story, something that I do not believe has been widely reported. Apparently, the doctors at the state hospital where she was sent basically keep her doped up on the highest possible doses of her meds. Otherwise, if she is medicated just enough to think lucidly, she realizes that she murdered all five of her children. Then she decompensates rapidly because the horror of her crime is too much for her brain to handle. Rather than keep putting her through this terrible cycle, her doctors have decided she is better off living in a hazy cloud of drugs (I must agree). Needless to say, this is why I detest TLC for giving the Quiverfull movement a TV platform.

    • Greenieweenie says:

      That woman who killed all of her kids in the 1990s—what was her name? Sharon something? She had PPD and that family was a Quiverfull style family, although that didn’t get a lot of press.

      The thing that bothers me always is the way these people trivialize pregnancy and childbirth. “Spurgeon is a big brother?” No, he’s not. Pregnancy is a possibility, not a promise. Childbirth is something you (baby + mother) must survive, not a guarantee. Nature doesn’t owe anyone or anything life, no matter what your political views are. These fundie people are trying to make a statement about life beginning at conception, so they treat a freaking fertilized egg as if it were a baby already. But IMO they really disrespect the whole process of carrying a child and giving birth by acting as though it’s just a technicality. Probably not explaining myself very well but I hate how these people talk about pregnancy.

      • Wren says:

        I totally understand what you’re saying. But the language isn’t uncommon; just a scroll through my fb feed shows that much. “So-and-so is going to be a big brother! *holds up sign with date some 7 months hence*”

        Modern medicine really facilitates this way of thinking, that there’s no risk, little chance of failure. Childbirth is far safer than in the old days, but there are still plenty of risks. Still, people talk about a pregnancy as a done deal, and I wonder if that contributes to the grief if one or both do not survive. It’s quite a far cry from ancient cultural practices of not naming a child until long after birth because survival was far from guaranteed.

      • Lucky Charm says:

        @ Wren, that’s why Catholics have traditionally baptized newborn infants. An unbaptized soul can’t go to heaven, and with a high infant morality rate they didn’t want to take any chances.

      • Sam says:

        But they believe that life begins at conception. To them, the child already exists. I don’t begrudge them those beliefs. When I was pregnant with Number 2, I used to let my daughter sing to her “little brother” before he was born. It was a nice little thing. I think you might be reading a little into it. If they believe in the humanity of the unborn, I don’t think that’s a hill worth dying on.

      • Greenieweenie says:

        @Wren, at least they put it in the future tense! “X is going to be a big brother” doesn’t bother me half as much. It’s just something I’ve noticed about the way they (the Duggars) talk and I think it’s very calculated. I thought their whole public funeral for the miscarried one was also very calculated. There is nothing they won’t exploit for their beliefs. But that’s fundamentalism. The belief system matters more than anything else.

    • Wren says:

      I don’t think there are statistics, but I know there’s plenty of anecdotal accounts of post partum depression and stories of other such issues from former cult members. Which would not be surprising, we in the secular world are just beginning to talk about it openly; imagine what an unmitigated “sin” it would be to suffer from such a condition when your sole purpose is having babies. And prayer is the solution to all problems, including mental health issues.

    • cynic says:

      @Naya, Is the documentary about Andrea Yates? I live in Texas and remember the case. Generally speaking, Texans usually aren’t very sympathetic to the insanity defense (even in cases, which, in my opinion, the person truly has mental issues). Yates’ husband, however, unintentionally caused most people to pity Andrea every time he gave an interview. He was such a colossal, smug jerk in insisting on his god-given right to spawn numerous children that most people felt that the wrong person was in jail.

      Because of her severe depression, her doctors plead with him to use measures to prevent another pregnancy, but he refused. The Yate’s belonged to a church group that believe that the wife should always acquiesce to the husband, so Andrea submitted to his wishes.

      • Sam says:

        The Yates case is actually used in college psych classes as a classic PPP case. I know, because it was taught to me!

        The case is beyond sad. Andrea developed depression after the birth of her first child. Her husband was warned multiple times that she was vulnerable to PPD and that it was getting worse after each birth. She was prescribed medications multiple times, which her husband demanded she stop because they “killed her urge.” He forced the family to move several times. He demanded that Andrea maintain the home, in addition to trying to homeschool the children, without assistance. He eventually made her stop seeing professional therapists and took her to their pastor instead. The whole case was just awful, awful, awful. This guy was warned repeatedly that his wife was sick, was getting worse, needed treatment, etc. And he kept getting her pregnant, over and over. And when she finally snapped, he “forgave” her and claimed to have no ill will towards her. It was such an awful case.

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        I think the fact that he made her live in a converted bus with three or four home-schooled toddlers also won her a lot of sympathy and led to Rusty being totally scorned. IIRC, he had a good-paying job at NASA, and housing prices in southeast Texas are low. There was absolutely no reason for them to live like that, except for Rusty’s control issues.

  5. Erinn says:

    I hate that name sooooo much. SO MUCH. It sounds like a condition. Or a sturgeon.

    I’m all for ‘different’ names – but something like this would be a lot … better? as a middle name. But then again … this poor kid is probably going to be stuck within that culty mess, so I guess it’s not like he’ll have to go out into the ‘real’ world as much as other kids.

  6. Shambles says:

    I had successfully forgotten that these useless cockwombles (thanks Sixer) had named their spawn Spurgeon. Why you had to go and remind me, Kaiser? It sounds like something an egotistical man would name his sperm. Like, his actual, physical sperm.

    • JenB says:

      haha! I have had the same gross thought. “Son, I spurgeoned your mother real good the night we made you.”

      • Sea Dragon says:

        +1 gross thoughts. They could have at the very least saved him from a lifetime of people snickering behind his back if they’d chosen it as his middle name. Poor kid.

      • Sea Dragon says:

        Indeed, “sperge” can be found in the urban dictionary. It matches our thoughts exactly.

    • Sam says:

      It is, in reality, the name of a very famous Christian preacher – though it wasn’t even HIS first name (his first name was Charles). I get picking names in line with your faith, but dude, you couldn’t do it as a middle name? Middle names are fine!

      The crazy thing is that the real Rev. Spurgeon was considered a progressive for his day. He was a vehement abolitionist who argued about Biblical bases for slavery. He was also a constant fundraiser. If you’ve ever heard of Spurgeons – that’s the charity he created, that is still around today, and it actually does decent work. I just find it hysterical that two people who basically get by through donations and charity, when they could easily work and support themselves, idolize a person who was so against that type of behavior.

  7. JenB says:

    It’s gonna be hard to top the name Spurgeon, even for a Duggar.

  8. Lucy says:

    I still cringe at that godawful name. Well, at anything involving these vile people, really.

  9. Zuzus Girl says:

    Keep ’em barefoot, pregnant and uneducated. It’s the best way to keep them from questioning their lot in life. I hate that phoney cult and this family.

  10. Bethie says:

    What an unfortunate name to give a child.

  11. Lama Bean says:

    Meh. Whatever melts their butter.

  12. Snappyfish says:

    How did the fridge get dented? Childish rage from uneducated youngsters playing at adulthood? Or the freebie came from the scratch & dent section? Having children is a v v important step in life & I fear her ridiculous upbringing makes her (& her younger husband) inept (at this time) to be proper parents. With no true income or basis to achieve the necessary income to provide basic needs to children I am expecting the adoptions will not become reality until those things change

  13. Birdie says:

    Well here comes my unpopular opinion, I like Jessa and her little family. I also like a few other Duggars. Of course not the molester/cheater. As I got older I found that there is not one true way to live. If this is their life and they are happy with it, fíne with me and they don’t hurt anyone. It may not be my cup of tea, but I won’t bash them. I don’t even mind Spurgeon. But I am german and we have names like Rüdiger.

    • Sam says:

      I do not hate the girls. I feel bad for them. I feel like they are existing the best way they can in a very bad situation. They’ve been raised from birth to believe that their sole life purpose is to get married, keep the home and make as many babies as humanely possible. That’s it. They were denied proper educations throughout life, have no marketable skills and probably have little means to actually support themselves.

      There is nothing wrong with choosing to be a stay at home mother and have a litter of children, provided that’s what you want and you can manage it. The problem with the Duggars is that they are not content to simply live this way on their own. They believe it to be the best way to live for everybody. They campaign for candidates that support their worldview, they promote their lifestyle as the “right” one. That’s the problem with them. Quiverfull is not just about a bunch of people who have a lot of kids because they like it – it’s a political movement that teaches that eventually, they’ll make enough babies to become a voting bloc that can swing America back to their own ideas. It’s nowhere near as innocent as it sounds.

      • Birdie says:

        Sam, interesting to read and I get what you’re saying. I actually do not agree with some of it.
        Everyone (who is politically active) supports candidates that support their world view, not only them. You seem to think that how they live is wrong, so you believe a different lifestyle is “right”, which you crticize of them. It is, to me, a bit far fetched, that everyone who lives Quiverfull only does so to become a voting block. That would be an intense dedication to politics to birth 19 kids only for this purpose. I actually watched a Youtube video the other day of two women living Quiverfull who distant themselves completely from the Duggars.
        I don’t live this lifestyle and I am not a fan, but I try to be more open.

      • Sam says:

        I think you are confused. Quiverfull is a specific movement. Not all large families are Quiverfull. Just because you have 10 kids doesn’t make you a Quiverfull family.

        Quiverfull is a specific religious movement founded by a husband and wife with, yes, the express purpose of breeding enough conservative Christians to sway elections and basically try to take over sections of the government. It’s a think, look it up.

        As for candidates, I disagree. The Duggars expressly support candidates that pledge to impose their views of the world onto others. Not all candidates do that. One can be personally conservative but understand that not all people feel that way. The Duggars back people like Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, who want to impose their own beliefs through the law. Can you not see the difference there?

      • Birdie says:

        Sam, please don’t get personal, telling me I am confused does nothing for the discussion.
        I am aware of what Quiverfull is and that not all big families are, tyvm. Also, I again disagree with you. The core of Quiverfull is to not use birth control and let God decide how many kids they will “receive”. It is in the bible, something about “a man who has a quiver full of kids is a happy man…” sth like that.
        “The Duggars expressly support candidates that pledge to impose their views of the world onto others.” Again, this is being done by lots of people with other views. You support those agreeing with your world views.

      • Sam says:

        No, I don’t. I support candidates who support freedom – the freedom to determine my own personal life, the freedom to marry, etc. My candidates are for allowing people enough freedom to direct their own lives. The Duggars support candidates who would outlaw abortions in ALL cases, crack down on birth control, restrict marriage, etc. It’s ignorant to pretend that backing a progressive is anything close to backing a regressive conservative. My worldview does not demand that everybody do as I do. The Duggars do.

      • Birdie says:

        Sam, I think freedom is a wonderful and complex concept. And it is great that you are enthusiastic about that. My whole point is, that I see how different they are and I see that their views are so different from mine, but I still won’t bash them and I don’t get worked up over it, because I accept that they are not like me. That won’t make me someone like them. I see that they are for example pro life and they have the right to support it. (I have a different view btw.) I am free in that way if you like. You can argue that it is the very right way to choose everything in ones personal life and The Duggars believe that God has rules for ones life to obey. So who is right? You say you are and they say they are.

      • Sam says:

        No, I’m not saying I’m right. I am saying that we should be allowed to disagree, but these people do not believe that.

        I have no problem with the Duggars choosing to live a conservative lifestyle. I have no issues with the number of children they have or how they structure their family dynamics. But that’s not the issue. The issue is that they believe their way of life is THE best, and they believe that all people should do that. I get that my lifestyle will not work for everybody. The Duggars want to ban abortions, for example – not just for people like them, but for EVERYBODY. Can you really not see the issue there? They support candidates that promise to take away the right of gay people to get married. If they personally can’t support gay marriage, that is their right. But they want to take it away from EVERYONE. At this point, anybody defending them, to me, must feel as they do.

        St. Paul said to “work out your own salvation.” I believe that. I believe that my duty is to live a righteous and moral life. I do not need to worry about anybody else, since they will deal with their own lives. The Duggars preoccupy themselves with others, though. That’s not exactly very Christian.

      • Jwoolman says:

        Actually, it’s been confirmed that they really are trying to outbreed the rest of us heathens…. I know that’s a common accusation against people with large families as a cultural thing, but in this case it really is part of the religion and they don’t deny it. They are raising up an Army for the Lord.

        Google for “no longer quivering” for some insights from people who were once in the movement.

    • Red32 says:

      But these girls think there is no other way to live. They aren’t educated, are told their only worth is in childbearing, and their father picks the only man they will ever have sex with. Oh, and if their brother molests them, it’s their own fault for tempting him.

      It makes me sick that this goes on in a free country.

    • Lucy says:

      The problem with these people is that, unlike you, they’re incapable of accepting and respecting that there are several ways of living one’s life. Not only incapable, but also perfectly proud of it.

  14. Sam says:

    I would fear for a child they’d adopt, and here’s why: most reputable agencies won’t deal with them. I have many friends who have pursued adoption, and it is not easy. First, these two are way too young, they have not been married long, they do not have stable, consistent careers, they do not have much parenting experience, etc.

    However, that doesn’t mean they can’t adopt. There are many stories of sketchy agencies willing to place children with people like them. A lot of them are evangelical organizations that convince birth parents to hand over their children with promises of placing them with “good Christian families” (obviously though, they consider a Good Christian solely to be evangelicals like them – no liberal or progressive Christians need apply). They also tend to use rather harsh parenting methods (Michelle admitted to blanket training her children, and there are pictures that suggest that Jill did it too). God help the child who has special needs or emotional or mental health care – can you imagine getting it in this family? I would genuinely worry about the well-being of a child adopted into the Duggar family.

    • Pansy says:

      What does “blanket training” mean? It either sounds like potty training or something horrible

      • Sam says:

        It is a method that is supposed to train children in self-control. Basically, once the baby becomes mobile, you put them on a blanket, on the floor. Sounds harmless, right? However, the point is that when the child attempts to crawl off the blanket, you “correct” them – usually this means flicking them, spraying them with water, etc. You’re basically trying to teach the child to remain within the confines of the blanket. It’s a technique common amongst these evangelical Christian types, who emphasize teaching children obedience and deferment to authority figures. You can google it pretty easily to see the different methods out there, but be warned that none of them are especially pretty.

      • Lindsay says:

        Or hitting them with a stick which is what the creators of blanket training recommend. It supposedly teaches unquestioning obedience to their parents no matter how arbitrary the rules.

      • Pansy says:

        Holy! That’s terrible! I’m a Christian and am raising my kids in a Christian home, but my gosh. To hit babies to teach them to submit to authority–seems like that would break the spirit God gave them!

    • mayamae says:

      No way are they adopting. They believe in the “sins of the father” concept.

  15. teehee says:

    Thats kinda what happens and the purpose of sex. So I dont get how people are surprised. (at the very core of it all)

  16. Jayna says:

    That guy can’t support the family. They live off fame and its proceeds.

  17. Lucky Charm says:

    It’s my understanding that one of the requirements to adopt is the youngest baby in the household can’t be under a year old. All this talk about adoption us just that, talk, because they have no interest in adhering to the requirements. I hope it’s another boy, because at least he’ll have a small chance (no matter how slight but still a chance) at some type of normalcy in his life.

  18. Frey says:

    These kids will probably definitely go broke when their show gets cancelled again…I’d say letting them adopt would be potential cruelty. Let them fuck up their own blood, don’t get outsiders involved.

    Whether or not they actually go broke again aside, these kinds of people shouldn’t be allowed to adopt, let alone procreate on their own.

  19. jenn12 says:

    Please, please can these people stop being a thing? Uneducated extremists should not be famous, or paid for their stupidity. It’s bad enough they won’t stop breeding.

  20. Zimmerman says:

    The longer they don’t adopt, the happier I’ll be. I grew up with an evangelical mother and it has affected me enormously. Now I’m pretty much an atheist, but for a deeply ingrained fear of hell, I can barely type that out.

    Though it’s hard to sometimes, I particularly sympathize with the Duggar girls b/c with homeschool, etc, they really have had no easy escape. The teachings run so so deep. A psychological mess!

  21. Bridget says:

    What else was she going to do? Get a job?

  22. Liza says:

    WTF is a Spurgeon????

  23. Hope says:

    I’m more surprised that the other sister who has the older baby isn’t knocked up yet. I know they are doing mission work but I just assumed they would have announced another pregnancy by now. Maybe Jessa is trying to one up her sister since she felt that she got hosed the first time around?

    • Sam says:

      Jill, I think, has to wait because she had a C-section. Getting pregnant immediately after a C-section can be genuinely dangerous, since the scar tissue in your uterus is not get set and strong enough to handle another pregnancy. The current guidelines say you should wait a minimum of 2 years between the birth and conceiving your next baby. I think Jill will wait a while to give herself the best chance at another viable pregnancy. She might not be educated, but I doubt she’s willing to play with her life that much.

      • Amanda says:

        I thought Jessa needed a c-section as well?

      • mayamae says:

        I’m glad Jill’s listening to medical advice – her mother didn’t. Michelle surpassed the c-section limit most doctors advise.
        Jill is pushing for a VBAC with her next pregnancy, and I can’t believe she’ll find anyone willing to try that in a home birth.

        @Amanda, No she had a home vaginal birth then almost bled to death before she got to a hospital.

      • Sam says:

        Oh, you can find people who will attempt a homebirth VBAC. The problem is that they’re not really qualified, since any decent midwife will tell you to get yourself to a hospital. The drawback is that many hospitals now have “once a section, always a section” rules. If you’ve had one C-section, you must give birth that way from here on out. I feel for Jill in the position she’s in. C-sections are not great for women who wish to have a higher number of children. I am glad that Jill seems to be taking the wise route, though. Hopefully she will eventually get the birth she wants.

        Michelle, don’t get me started on. Michelle got pregnant again after Josie almost died from complications. I don’t know if she’s ever shown great regard for her children’s health.

  24. HeyThere! says:

    I have two thoughts to this:
    A) Everyone I know has 2 or 3 kids close in age. This isn’t a big deal, most people do it this way. B) the only way his will be like omg is if they keep this up over the next 10 years. Let’s hope they stop after two.

    • pinetree13 says:

      HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! please. they won’t stop after two. Heck, even if they weren’t from the breeding-competition-religion, the very fact that they are both so incredibly young with two already, virtually guarantees more.

      I’d be be pleasantly surprised if she stopped before getting to double digits.

  25. lucy says:

    Oh no, another wide-eyed replicant! Do they think God is impregnating them or do they know how that actually happens?

    BTW, the term “knocked up” is jarring, demeaning, and unpleasant.

  26. Izzy says:

    I should HOPE they’re not adopting. Given their level of fame – or notoriety – any reputable adoption agency should be able to find out enough to realize that placing a vulnerable child with this family is ridiculous; there is a confirmed child molester in their midst who is allowed around children and not on the sex offender registry.

  27. Kate Kack says:

    Please add me to the list of NOT THESE TWO IGNORANT HOMOPHOBIC LOSERS.
    NO
    NO
    NO

  28. VegasSchmagus says:

    Let’s hope she’s not going to follow in her Mother’s footsteps by making HER vagina a clown car………

  29. Mollie says:

    That poor uterus.

  30. beauxblue says:

    it’s a surprise their pregnant? 2 young fertile people who don’t use birth control, they really are uneducated.