We've had five babies in 12 months, now we're saving up for a vasectomy

We've had five babies in 12 months, now we're saving up for a vasectomy
by SADIE NICHOLAS Last updated at 22:00pm on 4th January 2007



On the quiet road of neat, three-bed semis in Hemsworth, West Yorkshire, one house clearly stands out. There's nothing unusual about the festive wreath still hanging from the door, nor the child's pink bike waiting to be ridden on the lawn.

But the large skip on the driveway contains not the usual domestic detritus, but large bags containing 1,200 nappies.

Rachel Reidford, 24, and her partner Ricky Jones, 20, pay almost £200 a month for the private skip. The local council refused to provide them with an extra wheelie bin - such luxuries, said the bureaucrats, are issued only in extreme circumstances.

Yet Rachel and Ricky's circumstances couldn't be much more extreme. Just 15 months ago, they were a young couple, bringing up Rachel's six-year-old daughter from a previous relationship, Ellie. Today, astonishingly, they are parents to six - having had twins Evie and Elliot at the end of 2005, and triplets Harry, Alfie and Billy just ten months later. Amazingly, the children were all conceived naturally, with no help from fertility drugs.

"We get through 40 nappies - and that's on a good day," says Rachel, a former tax inspector. "You can imagine how quickly our bin gets full. We offered to pay the council for an extra one but they wouldn't allow it due to the 'additional landfill cost'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=426554&in_page_id=1879

Talk about some fertile folks :scared:

and unless a human has ZERO environmental impact - which is physically impossible, they don't have any right to judge. IMHO.

Redstone

to at least lessen the amount of diapers going into the landfill.

maybe they could just leave the kids naked in the bathtub 24/7 until they are toilet trained and then only flush after every 4 poops. (just kidding) :)

In all seriousness though when we are talking kids in diapers there just really no GOOD way to handle it. Human waste is human waste.

Several times over, if you have an efficient washer. For that matter, I'm sure any local diaper service would be happy to cut them a hell of a deal or even serve them gratis just for publicity.

And I cloth diapered mine and was just glad not to have to use a wringer washer like my mom did, so I get to say something.

Washing forties nappies a day (plus the clothes and blankies) will probably cause more of a strain on the environment than forty nappies pitched in the wheelie bin. There is no "better" way, other than to simply not have twins and then triplets. I mean, that's just silly! That dude has some industrial-strength sperm!

.

produces multiple eggs. Any fertile man produces millions of sperm -- plenty for two or three healthy eggs.

You guys never let me down!

.

:eyes:

.

Many years ago, I was in a relationship w/ a guy who wanted me to get pregnant. I had no intention of it and was on the pill. He referred to his "stealth sperm". The pill won. He was gone shortly after - my choice.

In his defense, I have to say that his comment was made very light-heartedly, in the essence of fun. I think some guys do have this impression that their sperm have supernatural powers.

Hmm, maybe my husband does. After our first daughter was born my body chemistry changed tremendously. I got pg on the pill :crazy: just 10 months later.

Thanks!!:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

scare the hell out of me :scared:
I would have an abortion if that were to happen to me, but that would be a pretty scary thing to have to do :-| .

(Although the phrase "industrial-strength sperm" is worth of a guffaw)

She produces multiple eggs, apparently.

There's always millions of sperm washing around. It's the number of eggs (or whether the egg splits) that makes twins or triplets.

We must get more funding for science in the schools. :)

Identical twins -- or any other number in a multiple birth -- result from the division of a single fertilised egg into two or more separate blastocysts, or clump of only a few cells, shortly after fertilization. If the separation is incomplete, the result is conjoined twins; the degree of incomplete separation determines whether the conjoined twins are just joined or share organs.

There is no definitive "cause" for this separation of the embryo; some researchers and anecdotal evidence suggest it is hereditary, but there's been no conclusive evidence. There is a theory that an "enzyme" present in the sperm of some men enters the fertilized egg and causes the splitting, but there's no real evidence of that. Another theory holds that it is environmental factors in the womb that cause the splitting. Whether the enzyme-enhanced sperm are genetically inherited or the environmental factors in the uterus, no one has determined. Identical twins, or triplets or whatever, are considered a "random" event, not genetic.

Fraternal twins or other multiple births result from the female releasing, and the sperm successfully fertilizing, more than one egg. The tendency to "hyperovulate" is inherited, but it can only manifest itself through the mother. In other words, if a guy's father has a non-identical twin or non-identical multiple births in his family, he himself cannot affect his partner's ability to have fraternal twins. He can affect his daughter's ability to hyperovulate and have fraternal twins.

Simply put, identical multiples are not determined to be genetic; fraternal multiples ARE genetic and it has to come from the mother's side of the family.


Tansy Gold, wondering about the teaching of science in this country since she learned most of this in freshman high school biology. . . . .

I learned it in high school too, missy.

use latex, dickhead!

That wasn't the case for this couple, however.

But she must have been pregnant just before she was fitted. Then she had her first five months of pregnancy with regular periods and no weight gain -- so she didn't know she was pregnant.

that in England "having a coil fitted" means getting and IUD. I was thinking they meant diaphragm.

Whereas diaphragms are shaped like bowls.

I asked about getting and IUD a couple of years ago, but my ObGyn doesn't put them in women that haven't had children yet. :shrug:

to go a private route, does the town think all those diapers would just magically disapear and not need to be disposed of?
:shrug:

Can you imagine the volume of laundry every single day if they used cloth?

three-bed semis, nappies, a skip in the driveway, an extra wheelie bin...LOL!

Oh, yeah...and FIVE BABIES! Frognal cogfosters and blimey, but I'd be headin' to the pub for a pint if I were that lad!

.

offer to help them out...but maybe they're quite rural.

The national health should get out the snippers and take care of that guy TODAY....!

For those unfamiliar with the lingo, a "skip" is a dumpster. That's insane that they must spend four hundred bucks a month to rent a damned dumpster. Like I said, the Council sucks.

Twins followed by triplets? 10 months apart? Man, mix in a condom every now and then, especially if you have newborn twins and don't want another so soon.

the children came from.

Plenty of people have three children. The woman had her first with another man. After that, she only had two pregnancies. If they had been like most people, this would have resulted in only three children, total.

when a women is only a month or two removed from giving birth and their five kids are only 10 months apart.

If they were born in just the right months, all five of them could be in the same class at school (being only 10 months apart).

Both my husband and I have siblings less than a year apart, and in both cases our parents were taking preventative measures.

Luckily for our families, the measures didn't work. I hope the children in this family will be able to say the same thing one day.

I have a cousin who was on the strongest birth control made and got pregnant with twins on her honeymoon. After the twins she wouldn't do intercourse for 10 weeks to make sure the birth control had kicked in. then they had the birth control pills AND condoms. She got pregnant again in 2 weeks with twins AGAIN. They were premies and her two sets of twins are exactly 9 months apart in the same calendar year.

with her on the pill, and no pregnancies. We don't want to go through another pregnancy/birth/infancy/toddlerism/etc. We're going to adopt a little girl soon, though.

I don't have children, but I do have pets and I've adopted older animals each time. Potty training is just not my thing...

;-)

Potty training is also not my thing - thus the adoption. :)

pregnancy, despite all our precautions -- because practically everyone else I knew had had at least one little "surprise."

If the person doesn't do it correctly (take the pill at exactly the same time every day with no misses), it is more likely to fail.

or something like that. I divorced that guy a few weeks after her birth.

After dealing with infertility and treatment thereof with my second husband (he has a zero sperm count) we discovered that I ovulate about one to three eggs every month whether I am on contraceptive therapy or not.

It happens.

and it failed. :shrug:

They think she must have been already pregnant.

Her births would have been closer to a year apart, rather than 10 months, except that the triplets were born early, as they usually are.

it obviously failed. So, she got her tubes tied - and that FAILED.

TWO pregnancies after deciding on the vasectomy.


Now, they tried to stop getting pregnant and look what happened. Who knows what these two went through.

I can't even imagine having to deal with 5 kids that quickly.

Birth control methods fail. This couple appears to be prime candidates, given their fertility.

My wife wouldn't let me touch her for 3 months after giving birth, and the doctor told us to wait at least 6 weeks before having sex. I can't imagine having sex 1 month after the twins were born.

Unfortunately, even condoms fail. I don't know what else is available so soon after childbirth. Most women who are nursing don't have periods again for several months.

My wife was able to take them, but she was unable to breast feed.

for five months that it hadn't worked, because she was having regular periods for the first five months.

is AMAZING!!! I know a whole bunch of people who would love some of her fertility dust! :)

but-they-sound-like-they're-doing-okay kind of way!

At this point, I probably have ten years or so before I get to enjoy being a grandma, if I'm lucky.

thing, and he's okay with that. Then again, I'm told this is NOT an uncommon reaction to have during some of the more "uncomfortable" times (with dire warnings about "wait until labor!" from certain nameless people), but "brain damage" will occur within a few hours of birth, and I will "forget" all the discomfort. I quoted "Dharma & Greg" at my husband: "Smart women don't forget!" (Then again, my mother had three children in separate pregnancies, and has been regaling me with tales of how she threw up every single day for six months -- and I'm her oldest....Hmmmm....Brain damage? Snicker!)

to the day I delievered. Not so much the active puking as unrelenting nausea with lots of dry heaves that occasionally became wet heaves. Oh, such are the wonders of pregnancy!

And then I had my little girl. 48 hours of labor.

I'm pretty firmly in the "never again" camp, but not because of the long labor. It's all those months of morning sickness, along with a host of other factors, that make me reluctant to ever do that again. I still get the heaves when I smell wet mulch (one of the big villains from my pregnancy days).

Ignore the labor horror stories, pack your bag early (I didn't -- oops!) and count down the days until the hyperemesis ends.

I was her first. In subsequent pregnancies, she just had the usual morning sickness for a few months.

Guess I was special.

:7

(I was learning about C-sections yesterday.) Anyway, since both C-Sections and Vaginal births sound EXTREMELY unpleasant (and just what the heck was I *THINKING* while going through EIGHT YEARS of infertility stuff, hmmm?), I have decided I want a "Star Trek" birth experience. One with a transporter, where there is a hum, pretty lights, no pain before, during, or after, and then I get handed newborns who looks to be about three months old, and will obviously be sleeping through the night in a colic free way immediately.

I'm even willing to make a few token groaning sounds, just for effect, of course! :)

I have a rich and vivid fantasy life! LOL! ;)

It's about time your husband pulled his weight -- let him go through the labor. ;-)

Seriously, though, I've had natural, and I've had a "light epidural." The former was a lot of "work." But the latter wasn't bad -- really. If that's one of your options, don't worry about the labor too much.

But maybe they'll want to do a c-section because of the triplets?

And you are right -- time for hubby to start pulling his weight -- HE can do the labor thing! ;)

Honestly, I'm thinking we'll probably end up with a C-Section, and it doesn't bother me that much. It sounds like it would be the "safest" thing for the babies (in case one gets twisted after the other comes out), and after reading a couple of horror stories about "deliver the first vaginally, and the second via C-Section" which would, in essence, be the "best of all possible worlds" (and yes, that's sarcasm!), it just sounds like the most sensible course.

I am, however, trying not to think about it too much right now; I just want them to keep cooking as long as possible!

Now, where do I get a hold of that "transporter" technology they keep showing on the "Star Trek" re-runs...? LOL!

both vaginally, at 40 weeks (she had to be induced). The first boy was 9 lbs. and the second boy was 7 lbs. It was such an unusual event, it was well attended by med students at the teaching hospital she gave birth at.

congrats on your pregnancy - hope it and the birth progress uneventfully!

The first because she had been in labor so long already and my nephew was a big baby (10 lbs). And with the second they were still worried about having a vaginal after C section.

She told me the worst part of the C was when they were putting everything back in to finish up. She said it felt like they were punching her in the stomach. :( Don't pay too much attention to me though, I don't have children. I did have a spinal tap when I was 18, and one of my teachers told me that having a spinal tap (she had one before) was way more painful that her vaginal births. So I only know what it's not like. :)

I like your vision of giving birth more though. :)

edited to add: Congrats on your pregnancy, but too bad about the nausea.

;-) Seriously, getting 'em out is not going to be that bad, even if it sucks. It's kind of like pulling an all-nighter -- thinking about doing it beforehand is harder than actually doing it. You will be so bored out of your mind with the bedrest that you will be probably be eager for Delivery Day. Hell, you're probably halfway there now, except every week you keep them inside is less time in the NICU. You keep 'em until 34 weeks, as planned, and they probably won't have to stay in the hospital for long.

when I was about 8.5 months pregnant - a little too late.

My little beauty had her own ideas about how to come into the world - 48 hours of labor, no pain meds/anesthesia, fully dilated and effaced, then she refused to engage the birth canal. I'd push, she's pop back in.

We accuse her of not wanting the smashed face look the birth canal creates. I was just looking at her C-section pictures the other day. . . That's not what I meant when I said I wasn't going through labor! :silly:

But they're not quite as effective as the full-dose pills (93% for low-dose pills vs. 99.9% for full-dose pills.)

came. 36-38 weeks is considered "full term" for twins; I don't remember the "triplet" stuff, but I think average is between 28-32 weeks. (I'm carrying twins.)

There might be a little more time in between than appears, is all I'm saying. Then again, I'm thinking he's lucky he ever got near her again after a "normal" twin pregnancy -- mine is NOT fun! :) Hyperemisis blows chunks -- literally! :)

(Note: Hyperemisis is basically "super can't stop puking a lot!")

Congratulations on your pregnancy! When are you due?

stuff for twins, my goal is April Fool's Day; the doctors say they will be happy with anytime in March! :) I've been told I have a 50/50 shot of getting there....(crossing fingers)

So far, other than the hyperemisis, things are going well (except for the whole "acid reflux" thing that just recently started -- sigh). I've been doing the "bedrest" thing for a while now, but other than being more than a tad bored (and learning way too much about our small claims court system because of all the "Judge" shows!), it hasn't been TOO terrible. The nausea/vomiting is the worst. Sigh. Blessed be the Zofran, for instead of throwing up six times a day, its at two or three times a week -- woo hoo?

Oh, and we are officially at "25 weeks, and 2 days" now, and we are having one of each -- they are kicking up a storm at the moment! :)

I'm REALLY impressed with how together the couple in the article are -- I'm bookmarking it for when I need some inspiration!!! AND she got her triplets to 34 weeks -- it sounds like a MIRACLE to me! :)

says that they were using protection. And were even more careful after the twins were born.

My SIL missed one pill, doubled up the next day and she was pregnant that month.

I guess the guy's little swimmers are just stronger than normal. I hope they're a LOT more careful until the vasectomy.

My sister-in-law had her tubes tied and still gotten pregnant twice (or so she says - she's kind of an attention hog). Neither pregnancy survived past the first trimester.

sperm decked out in warrior regalia and all that silly bull but for the love of Pete guys, let it go already.

She obviously ovulates more and better quality eggs than most women and has a strong body that is healthy and receptive to the demands of pregnancy.

He could have average or fairly poor sperm, slightly pathetic sperm even and they still could have achieved these pregnancies because there are millions upon millions of sperm, just a few good quality eggs in this instance and usually only one.

A MONTH after she had twins!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Poor thing probably wasn't even healed up yet. That's just WRONG. And IMHO he shoulda had the vasectomy as soon as those two were born.

These came at 34 weeks. She had an IUD, but was getting periods, and didn't know for the first five months that she was pregnant.

Women recover from childbirth at different rates. And she'd been fitted with an IUD, which tends to have failure rates comparable to sterilization (yes, even sterilization fails) but it didn't work.

Despite the fact that she's clearly an adult, she must not be capable of giving consent to sex. He must have "banged her" with absolutely no input, decision making, or consultation on her part. Hell, maybe she didn't even know- he snuck up on her and did it real fast.

:sarcasm: :eyes:

Isn't that what Liberals and Progressives do?

Those are THEIR kids, not ours.

Jesus.

Redstone

Hell, I have 5 kids myself :)

Other than that, I agree completely.

Actually, anyone who can handle five babies at once isn't going to be scared of some self-righteous would-be "progressive" axe-grinders. They'd eat em for fucking breakfast.

This thread has made me laugh so hard my abdominal muscles ache. Hubster can hear me laugh all the way downstairs (where he is seriously watching the UCONN women play Tennessee (he gets wound up tight with these games).

couple with so many kids.

Speaking as the mother of three babies who loved to be jiggled.

:rofl:

Redstone

there...the names of things will be a constant source of hilarity.

Children are delightful. But MY LORD that is a massive amount of work. I am having a heart palpitation just thinking about it. My husband and I are stressing over how we might pay for the one child we are planning on having. I can't even imagine the cost (in time and money) of caring for 5 very little ones and a wee 6 year old.

Yikes!

This couple sounds like they're managing to keep all the heads above water.

and I am happy for them. I shudder at the thought of it for myself, but they seem remarkably balanced. I still am amazed that they can do it. I am just trying to imagine how I would make that work here where I live. I don't think it would be possible. Perhaps if I lived in a more affordable area, it would seem more manageable. But then, having all those little ones around would prolly render me mental anyways. I'm an only child... it would be too great a shock to the system. :)

hell one of the reasons i used to give for not having kids was the existence of twins, esp. after a close friend went thru hell w. hers

god just don't like these people -- 5 "blessings" in 12 months, shoot me now!

lol -- mother nature will find a way -- won't she?

they must be feeling a bit overwhelmed.

the council is just being stupid and stubborn.

you help your community -- not hurt it.

wonder why the national health wouldn't pay for the vasectomy??

He is only 20 and I guess they think he might want more kids. Like 5 isn't enough!

If anyone should be considered an exception to the age rule...

(I am opposed to age rules, by the way.)

after the horse gets out.

If I were his wife, he wouldn't have to worry about saving up for a vasectomy, I would give him one myself. ;-)

Just say NO, Rachael.

they'd have quadruplets next time. And ten kids WOULD be a little excessive.

:)

They'd have had to wheel me straight from the delivery room to the psychiatric unit if that had been me!

And I thought 2 babies in 15 months was tough! Man, it was a picnic compared to what this couple is doing.

This guy is so fertile he can knock you up over the internets. (You see it is a series of tubes starting in England...)

I better go take a pregnancy test to be sure! :rofl: