Posted on 08/17/2011 11:17:55 AM PDT by NYer
ROCKVILLE, MD, August 16, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) — The astonishing story of a Maryland family with 11 children, ranging in age from 1 to 12, has been featured in a back-to-school piece by the Washington Post Newspaper. The August 10 story chronicles the Kilmer household's day-to-day life and details how they manage to stay lighthearted and have fun while balancing what some might consider an impossibly difficult lifestyle.
Read the Washington Post story here.
In an interview with LifeSiteNews (LSN), Larry Kilmer, a native of Halifax, Nova Scotia, said he viewed speaking with the Post about his family as "an opportunity to show that large families can exist and survive in the Washington area."
"It was a chance for others to see that with some sacrifices it can be done," he said. "Despite the fear that 'you cannot survive,' we wanted to show that it is possible."
The article introduces readers to Larry, a high school teacher, and his wife Jen, a stay-at-home mom, as well as children Christina, Joe, Michelle, Julie, Tommy, Steven, Matthew, John Paul, Larry, Rosemary, and Peter, none of whom are twins or triplets.
The feature chronicles the Kilmer family's daily life, from 5 a.m. to 9 p.m. It notes the many challenges the family faces, but also highlights the many blessings, including the tight friendships shared by the children and the role that the "rock of Faith" plays in the Kilmer household.
"A large family helps to instill in a person many of the strong values and virtues that a society needs in order to survive and continue," Kilmer told LifeSiteNews.com. "In my opinion, the issue of putting others first is at the heart of a large family as you work and exist with other human beings in a close-knit environment."
Commenting on the Washington Post story, Jenn Giroux, founder of Speaking of Motherhood, who is also the mother of a large family, told LSN, "This is an incredible and fair portrayal of this beautiful large family. It is rare to get this perspective from a liberal media outlet."
"Large families have a positive impact on society," Giroux said. "At a time when our national birthrate is dangerously low, large families are producing the future workers that will sustain the elderly in the very near future… They are raising the next generation of Church and political leaders."
"At the heart of large families is the surrender to God’s supreme rights over our lives and an embrace and love of His gift of children," she said. "Unfortunately, this is a foreign and/or unknown concept that has been gradually lost over the last 50 years."
"It requires ‘blind trust’ in God in times of difficulty," Giroux said. "This is a difficult concept for a contracepting society where those today seek to control everything from the day they conceive to sometimes the very sex of their baby."
Read the Washington Post story here.
Hey, if the government quits taking money from me to give to other people, I give you my solemn word to never make a similar comment.
Thank you for your devotion and love for your sibling. No greater love than this. I’ve never had to endure that but someday, it will come. I can’t imagine it.
You assume that this family takes government money. Why don’t you email them and find out?
I know a local family that has 5 kids and a heroin addiction. Everyone coddles their addiction because they have kids. They can’t send them to a 90 day program because they have kids. Meanwhile, the kids are almost feral and pedophile bait.
Guess so. The woman didn't have a period for 12 years.
You’re just totally not getting it. But that’s okay.
You have the option to vote for representatives who are against all forms of social welfare spending at every opportunity. Other than that, you may fuss.
Fair enough. I’ll let you know if I get an answer.
You have yet to establish where this family takes a penny of taxpayer money.
EVERYTHING you have written on this thread has been based upon totally unsubstantiated estimates of how much money this man earns.
Private school teachers in the DC area can easily earn close to $100K per year. He also paints houses when he's not teaching and a person can earn a substantial income from that if they are good at it.
You also need to realize that household costs do not rise geometrically with more children; some expenses do, but not all.
Unfit means conservative and homeschooling in the eyes of the state.
Fair enough. I’m admittedly speculating. Can we at least agree that if they are taking public assistance that it’s not a good thing?
I’m surprised the tone of the Post article is not “they are stealing your air and destroying the planet”
No, I do not agree. Why should people's right to exist be conditional upon their being net tax contributors rather than tax-beneficiaries? How can we even calculate that, over an individual's lifetime or a family's lifetimes; over the range of taxes everyone pays, and government facilities and services that exist?
What "assistance" do you imagine this family receives that outweighs the $100,000 per year (give or take a smidgen) that is NOT being spent on their children in public schools?
However, I would also like to point out that the average family who has children in public schools is getting more money from the government than they are putting in and those with three or more children almost certainly are.
This family has their kids in Catholic school, every private school I know of has financial assistance available that is PRIVATELY FUNDED and most of them also offer reduced tuition for the children of parents who teach there.
Okay, I found the Q and A and this is one answer, you see it as weasel words and I see it as someone who scimps and depends on God as well as of course her and her husband’s own hard work. Also, from the photos and article, it’s obvious they are not high rollers and have no luxuries at all. Notice the questioner doesn’t even think this family should purchase discounted food!
Having a big family was your CHOICE
I do not believe you should get discouted food for a personal lifestyle choice. There are responsible families with reasonable family sizes who ARE Needy and should get discounted food. You just chose to have more than you can pay for.
–
August 11, 2011 1:14 PM
A.
Terri Sapienza : [the interviewer]
If I can step in here, Jen and Larry CAN pay for the needs of their children. The gifts and/or help they receive from others are never solicited. They absolutely take their own responsibilty for their children and would without any help, too.
Are you seriously asking me why people should be self-supporting? Really?
Do you go around your neighborhood, counting the number of children, figuring the per-pupil cost at your local school, estimating their property tax and state income tax payments, and then leaving nasty-grams for those who are "receiving benefits"? And oh my goodness, what if they have a special-needs child in public education!!!
Do you check the value of people's cars to make sure they're paying enough personal property tax to cover their road usage? Beat up on people who have a house fire, because the cost of putting it out is more than they paid in fire-service charges?
If not, why not? Every cent of it is coming from you, right?
The older we get the more we realize how much we treasure one another.
As a husband to a wonderful wife, and father to four beautiful children, I’d say that if “momma’s happy, everyone’s happy”. Sure dads bewildered, but that’s sort of normal for a guy who works all day then comes home to ANY number of children.
God bless them!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.