<p>What do those who approve of the quiverfull lifestyle think of the OctoMom?</p>
<p>Speaking from a conservationist’s point of view, it’s stupid to have that many children, regardless of the reasoning.</p>
<p>“What do those who approve of the quiverfull lifestyle think of the OctoMom?”</p>
<p>It is not “dangerous” for lack of a better word to the children to have child after child after child, though it’s not something that’s personally appealing to me. It is most certainly dangerous to the children to be one of a deliberately-created group of supermultiples. As a mother of twins and someone who got extremely ill during my pregnancy and has spent more than my fair share of time in an NICU, the idea of creating supermultiples is appallingly dangerous for the babies, who are exposed to great risks from prematurity. That’s the distinction, to me.</p>
<p>"Yet, in spite of my “feminist” behavior, I see no reason to criticize, comment, or discuss a quiverfull life. </p>
<p>To each her own. She can be submissive and I can have a nanny. Motherhood is not one-size-fits-all."</p>
<p>I agree, DougBetsy. The Duggar circumstances don’t particularly bother me one way or the other. As long as they aren’t on welfare, I couldn’t care less if they choose to have 18 or however many children.</p>
<p>mimk6–you’re right, certainly not all homeschoolers do this. However, all of the homeschoolers I’ve met who homeschool for religious reasons, cite immorality and secularism in the public school as the problem they’re trying to counter. They wish to avoid godless teaching and replace it with God-centered instruction, and they desire to protect their children from secular and ungodly influences. Therefore, when these parents allow their kids to participate in activities outside the home, the activities tend to be things like church-based Pioneer or AWANA Clubs or church-based scouting groups, church sports leagues, activities and classes sponsored by religious homeschool cooperatives, and individual music or swimming instruction with carefully screened teachers. This is not a terrible plan, of course, but I would argue that it fails at the heart of the matter because the premise upon which it is based is faulty.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And what is wrong with that? How is it different from people who put their kids in parochial school? It’s a different style of teaching to homeschool than to go to a private religious school but do you also have a problem with people who put their kids in parochial school because they want to avoid secular and ungodly influences? People have a right to raise their kids according to their religious beliefs.</p>
<p>Mimk6 said: "People have a right to raise their kids according to their religious beliefs. "</p>
<p>While I understand that this is in fact in the bill of rights, it always gives me just a little bit of a pause when I see students being taught things that are factually wrong.</p>
<p>If I were a public school history teacher and taught that George Washington was a woman (to give a ridiculous example), I would be censured and possiibly lose my teaching certificate. Teachers in many states have to pass tests on their subject knowledge. Yet you can go to any home schooling information site and find examples that are just as egregious. And no one can criticize the homeschoolers? </p>
<p>Yes, there are excellent homeschooling situations–mini’s comes immediately to mind–but there are also situations that border on child abuse, simply because the child reaches adulthood ignorant.</p>
<p>So my son is entering a piano competition with a significant financial prize. His teacher was talking to him today about what he can expect in terms of the competition and she said, “I wonder if those homeschooled kids are entering the competition.” My ears perked up and I said, “Why, are they good?” She said they are amazing and kind of known in the music teacher community. Because they have talent and interest in piano, their education is geared around their music and they can practice for several hours a day. My son is also talented and loves playing but there is no way he can practice for hours a day because he is in school six hours a day, transporting to school about two hours a day and doing a lot of homework. Which would be okay, except that I am darn sure that he could learn what he’s learning in school in about two to three hours a day and he really could be playing piano for hours, reading for hours and doing what he loves to do best - learning on his own. So sure he’s out in the world. Today, he got to see some kid on campus smoking pot. Very edifying. He tells me that at least half the time in class is often wasted and he’s in a very good program. His older siblings would confirm that. So I’m not sure I’ve done him such a huge favor sending him out into the world, if we’re talking about him really developing his talents and passions. As for things being taught that are factually wrong, do you really think that doesn’t happen in public school? And if we are talking about quality control – sure it’s uneven in homeschooling, but it’s also very uneven in public school. Someone told me today about a teacher that her daughter actually has who teaches the first period and records the lesson and then PLAYS THE TAPE for the following periods while she eats. Parents have called and complained, etc. but it’s unlikely too much will change – so far, nothing has. And I have personally known teachers who more than bordered on child abuse and not because the kid might be ignorant, but because there WAS actual emotional abuse and humiliation going on. I once had a teacher tell me that the teachers at her school were distraught that a particular teacher was there year after year abusing kids emotionally. And believe me parents and faculty were complaining – but tenure makes it very difficult to remove an incompetent or abusive teacher. Believe me, if you taught that George Washington was a woman in these parts, your principal might correct you if he got wind of it, but nothing would happen to you.</p>
<p>The duggars are an extreme and aren’t comparable to the typical homeschool or religious schooled families. The typical students who homeschool are usually involved with some community activity – a local sports team, college class, part-time job, volunteer project etc. Students at religious day school have a whole host of ECs to choose from, even if there are limits with respect to co-ed activities or sports. But the duggars have essentially separated their kids, esp. their older daughters from everyone. Their world seems to revolve around cooking/cleaning for 20 people and raising the younger siblings. The most conservative religious people that I know don’t allow their daughters to go out much or have male friends, but they do allow them to have girlfriends so they at least get to talk/hang out/gossip – do the normal teenage things though with restrictions. The duggars don’t seem to allow them to hang out with anyone besides family. I’m sure it’s a combination of not being allowed and not having time since they are essentially running the household.</p>
<p>Homeschooling is one thing… continuously popping out babies and pushing earth toward some kind of Malthusian end-game is another.</p>
<p>Mimk6: A child who doesn’t misbehave because he is seldom given the opportunity, is not necessarily a well-bred or morally upright child. Only a child who is exposed to temptation and overcomes it can be said to be morally upright. Jesus himself had to learn obedience, according to the Scripture. The Bible also says Christians are to be IN the world, but not OF it. The apostle Paul coined the famous expression “When in Rome” to explain that he participated in normal social activity. Christian believers are called to be the salt of the earth, which means they have to leave the “salt shaker.” They’ve been given the great commission to GO and make disciples. I don’t think the philosophy adhered to by the Duggars and friends conforms well with these Biblical admonitions. </p>
<p>Protecting our children from ugly things they aren’t prepared to deal with, and providing them with wholesome activities is perfectly fine. We all try to do that as good parents. But what we’re talking about here is an extreme, as aj725 points out.</p>
<p>Public schools are not the end all and be all, to be sure. But how is it a good idea for my child to have as a teacher every single year a person who has never taught that grade or those topics before? Because that is what happens with first-born homeschoolers. And can one person really properly homeschool more than a few kids (18?) of disparate ages? And I could add much more about the lack of quality and breadth I’ve seen in the homeshooling community that would never be tolerated in a decent suburban school, but that would take all day. I do know one woman who homeschools exceedingly well. It’s possible and admirable when it happens.</p>
<p>mimk6, hindsight is 20/20, but if I had to do it again, we would have homeschooled S2 at least during senior year. School for him was a waste of time, although he got a pretty good GPA. He found hours to practice because he was adept at getting his homework done during school. No APs but quite a few honors classes. He would never have survived senior year except that he was able to dual enroll at the local university, taking music classes there. Of course, because the univ classes met MWF or TTh, he had the other afternoons off and could devote himself to practice.</p>
<p>I did things for him that I previously would have considered anathema. Several times, I called him in sick so that he could stay home and practice. He swore to me that there was nothing serious going on an school (ie. watching a movie), and he needed to practice. I think he would have actually gotten a better, and more interesting, education, as well as have had time to practice had he been homeschooled. </p>
<p>That said, I have a Ph.D. in a humanities field & DH in engineering so between us we were qualified to teach most subjects he would have needed.</p>
<p>Homeschoolers have done quite well at the national spelling bee, too. They have more time and flexibility than regular school attenders for special interests. Again, if this is done with intelligence and balance, it’s great. But homeschooling moms have confessed to me that their Adam hasn’t really studied math yet (or science, or social studies, or… fill in the blank) yet–and he’s 14 years old–because he doesn’t enjoy it, but isn’t it wonderful that he is spending all his time doing what he really enjoys instead. Besides, he learns math by setting the table…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t really understand this. Given an opportunity? My kids needed no opportunity (at least a couple of them) to misbehave. It came naturally. I do think some kids kind of naturally behave – I did have at least one like that – but they are generally the exception, not the rule. Most kids have no trouble finding ways to misbehave even if they are home most of the time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, the Bible says that (salt of the earth). But obviously it doesn’t mean we just throw our children into the world like sheep to wolves. It’s talking about Christians, but not necessarily children. If you want to go to Scripture, there is plenty of Scripture that talks about parents training and teaching their children – and none of it involves sending them to school. And in fact, at dinner, I discussed this thread with my son who quoted the same verse you did – Go and make disciples – he said, “If people believe the great commission and are going to make disciples, it seems that the very first place they should start is with their own children.” Verses that teach that it is the parents’ job to teach and admonish their own children: Deuteronomy 6:6-7; 20-23 "These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up…When your son asks you in time to come, saying, "What do the testimonies and the statutes and the judgements mean which the Lord our God commanded you? then you shall say to your son, “We were slaves to Pharaoh, so the Lord commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God for our good always and for our survival, as it is today.”</p>
<p>Ephesians 6:4: “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” Lots of stuff in the book of Proverbs, etc. There is really nothing at all in Scripture about outsourcing a child’s education. Yes, they have to leave the salt-shaker. But when? At age six? Ten? Sixteen? Who says when the proper time for leaving is?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, there have been a lot of people throughout history who were tutored by one person for a long time – governesses who tutored all the children in a family, etc. Certainly our country expanded from East to West with one-room schoolhouses where everyone of disparate ages was taught by the same teacher. Somehow we survived as a country. When my son was in second grade his teacher had a huge project called Apple Valley where the kids learned what life was like in a one-room schoolhouse in the 1800s or so (I think it was the 1800s). All the kids were shocked at how much schoolwork those kids had to do and how much they had to learn. The standards were pretty high. Also, if you put disparate aged kids together, younger kids who are gifted can move ahead and those who need extra help can stay behind – not everyone has to be on the same track with some kids either bored or falling through the cracks.</p>
<p>mimk6: You can disciple children quite well without homeschooling them or keeping such tight control that their every waking moment is always spent in Christian circles, supervised by Christian adults, and doing Christian activities. Again, of course we want to protect our kids–it’s about having moderation and balance. As for our noble past, well, folks with this philosophy seem to idealize the past. Anything before 1950 in America is viewed as more spiritual than anything after that. For example, these groups publish catalogs of books and toys for children which are frontier-type items. Guns and tools are the thing for the boys, and the catalog suggests they use them to protect their younger sisters (who obviously need protection because who can run very fast or far in those long prairie dresses?)</p>
<p>There is no indication that Duggar homeschooling resembles homeschooling of those who are interested in having their children learn at their own pace, have a variety of non-conformist learning experiences, participate in homeschooling groups, or have master teachers. </p>
<p>I have seen homeschooling work well, and it is educated parents who realize their own limitations (I have an English and education degree from a prior life LOL, and I wouldn’t dream of thinking that I could teach my children Calculus or Physics), and hire professionals or on-line services for these reasons. </p>
<p>Homeschooling around the kitchen table, with mother as teacher, is exceptionally limiting, because there is no way that Mrs. Duggar, with no college education of her own (at least I think not) is capable of educating 18 children of disparate ages in all subjects K-12. It’s ridiculous and limiting for her children to have no exposure to any ideas, except those that she offers, with her limited educational background, as it is. I’d imagine that those children are woefully undereducated, with exceptionally narrow world views. Why would anyone condone willful mis or undereducation?</p>
<p>I know some homeschoolers and sadly, I am not impressed, though I think the idea is fascinating. </p>
<ol>
<li>a family where both parents work and the girl “homeschools” by baby-sitting her little brother. That’s it. She’s the free baby-sitter. </li>
<li>a family of “unschoolers” where the 15-year-old boy does great woodworking, but can’t read because he never felt the inclination to learn how to do it.</li>
</ol>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think for us there are upsides and downsides of every alternative. DS is a very social creature and does like the whole social side of school quite bit. But I would have been nervous to go another route this time with the fourth kid, because he’s the one who stands to benefit from all the experience garnered from the others. We know who the good and not-so-good teachers are at his school and what the good and not-as-good courses are. And, as odd as this might sound, we’ve figured out the college admissions process through this route. We know how to do it. We know the whole routine of AP courses, ECs, etc., etc. and trying to figure college admissions out from the homeschooling experience would have been completely unchartered territory and I’m not sure I wanted to gamble that with this particular kid. And I think there would have been a big learning curve. It seemed better (for him and for us) to stick with the known, the proven, the familiar.</p>