This Mother Finally Gives Birth To A Girl After Having 10 Boys In A Row
241Kviews
Probably no one would argue that some of us like to stick to the plan at whatever cost and some of us would just rather go with the flow whenever possible. But, as the saying goes, man plans and God laughs. And despite one’s beliefs, probably all of us can find some kind of beauty in the surprises life brings us. This particular British family has probably had more of them than anyone else, especially when it comes to parenthood. But how else can it be living with so many children, they sure are in for a rollercoaster. Scroll down below to find out about their latest one!
This is the Brett family with their newest addition, a baby girl
After having her youngest son with quite an unusual name of Rothagaidh two years ago, Alexis Brett became the first Mom in Britain to give birth to 10 boys in a row and thought her family was complete. But it later turned out life had a little surprise planned for her and the whole family as well – a new addition. Therefore, just a couple of weeks ago, she became a mother of 11 just at 39 years old. She has spent more than 8 years being pregnant during the last 18 years of her life and is now very happy with her big family.
The girl is named Cameron and is the 11th child
After her long streak of boys, Alexis finally gave birth to a baby girl and decided to name her Cameron. The happy parents say she changed the family dynamics quite a bit with all the brothers being super attentive not to wake their little sister and being more well-behaved in general. This sure brings much joy to the parents, who say this last pregnancy was unplanned but did get them over the moon, as they expected it would be yet another boy after finding out about expecting another baby. The delighted mother adds that they are definitely stopping now. “There’ll be no more. I said that last time but this time, I absolutely mean it. I love my family as it is now.”
The first 10 being boys that are now aged from 2 to 17
The family is used to people commenting by now and not all the remarks are very pleasant. Alexis says, “Some people think we must be on benefits but we’re not. David has a good job, which means we don’t even qualify for full child benefit.” Her husband is a train driver and usually leaves the house around 5:30, leaving his wife to use the little quiet time she has in the morning before the kids wake up to enjoy her cup of coffee and a shower. Even though life is not easy being a mom to 11 kids as she has to do 49 loads of laundry a week and hoover seven times a day, Alexis plans to get back to work as a part-time fitness instructor in a few weeks.
After Cameron was born, the mom of 11 says she feels the family is now complete
Of course, it is not all sunshine and rainbows and Alexis admits to sometimes exchanging looks with her husband David and thinking, “What have we done,” but the kids always come up with something surprising then, melting the hearts of their parents and making it all worthwhile in the end.
And the Internet is slightly conflicted about their news
241Kviews Share on Facebook
It's just utterly ridiculous in this day and age to have that many children.
Ever think of adopting a girl after say the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th boy?
She probably wouldn't be eligible. Suprising amount of rules around adoption. Load More Replies...
Indeed. In the UK, friends were made clear very quickly it wasn't going to happen unless one of them gave up their job, and strongly preferably she (senior lecturer) if not he (full professor). Who cares their colleagues in similar situations are raising their (own) kids no problem.
Nowhere in the article does it say that she was trying for a girl. A lot of the in-article commenters assume that too, and the use of "finally" in the title sure implies it, but reading through it really sounds like she just wanted a lot of kids.
Adoption is too hard in many places. It's both faster and easier to go for IVF or get a surrogate to bring a new child into this world than it is to adopt a child in desperate need of a home. I get that it needs to be strict to ensure kids don't go to bad parents but come on......
Not sure if there's a religious aspect here, but a lot of fundies won't adopt because they believe that children can biologically inherit their parents' sin.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Ever thought of minding your own business and not judging a woman for having as many kids as she wants?
The dad tho he looks like he lost his will to live like 4 boys ago and they just kept sucking the life out of him each time she had another.
True but he could have done something about it, lol. Load More Replies...
Very true, technically he is 1/2 a contributor........I was gonna say "or is he" but all the kids look EXACTLY the same so he is definitely a contributor lol
Each time she had another? it takes two to get pregnant, if he didn't want any more he should have put a knot in it.
Looks like the second tallest kid had a lot of life sucked out of him too lol
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
That is just mean.
It's just utterly ridiculous in this day and age to have that many children.
So much breeding, this is why the planet is in collapse. Load More Replies...
The planet isn’t about to collapse. The planet it will survive. That said, the megafauna (elephants, rhinos, polar bears, etc.) are pretty much screwed—and it’s because the ZPG movement (Zero Population Growth) of the late 1960s/early 1970s came and went without really effectively getting their message out there. Prior to the 1960s, birth control was unreliable and frequently not used at all; however, The Pill changed all that. That was the genesis of the Sexual Revolution, and birth rates did go down, but not nearly enough. I’m glad I’ll be dead when things get really bad; I really don’t understand how people can bring children into a world of increasing scarcity.
And the reasoning behind this would be...? I'm not trolling here, I'm genuinely asking.
If this was the norm, it would take one single generation for the total population to rise fivefold. Probably more like quadrupling, since not everybody can or want to have children. It is bad enough to add another billion in a generation.
Hi, Orillion. I absolutely agree with you. I did not imply that this is common at all, I tried to answer his question in a way that would also make people think. Later, I checked what I said about adding another billion in a generation. I am troubled to say that I was off the mark by a fair bit. Right now, we will become a billion more much faster than a generation. To Full Name, if much more people than now chose to not have children, and many more would opt for fewer children, then the chances for longtime survival of humans, as well as an awful lot of other species on our little planet would increase greatly.
@Monika Soffronow I'm fairly confident in saying families like this are, and will always be, extreme outliers. This is not a case where people will read this and go "we should have 11 kids too".
The ignorance in the responses to your question are astounding. Do these people also criticize people that have zero children? If we all had no children then the population would go to zero in one lifetime.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Who are you to say? Some people want 0 and they wanted 11. Plus they can afford them!
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
If you can't figure this out on your own then I really don't feel like helping you.
Overpopulation is a thing! Stupid, selfish and downright evil!
They're rank amateurs compared to America's Reality TV right-wing-extreme-Christian baby factory known as the Duggars.
Apparently the entire country of India also didn't read that memo!
The fertility rate for India in the year 2017: about 2.3 children born per woman of childbearing age. According to the World Health Organization, 2.1 is the replacement rate.
this!! thank you
And what does that have to do with you and this day and age?
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
It's her body and her choice.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
People can have as many children as they want what gives YOU the right to say its "utterly ridiculous". It's THEIR choice.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Says who? You? It doesn't make any less sense for this woman to have ten children then it does for anyone to not have children. For all the talk of pro-choice in society some of you @sshats sure do like to sh1t on the people who decide to embrace having children. Get lost.
Its not about having children, it is about having 11 (eleven) children! Why do you make so many? Do you think the kids are happy wearing their older brothers' clothes and not having any attention from their mother being bussy with the latest baby? Do you honestly think it is a good idea? Also - the Earth is overpopulated and soon we will have to restrict ourselves to having one child - why she gets to have 11 - how are her genes better than anyone else?
Victoria, would you defend my right to use nuclear weapons? No, I did not think so. Not everything is, or should be, on the "my-choice-if-I-want-to spectrum. At the present moment, we, as a species, by means of overpopulating it, are destroying our one and only planet as efficiently as if were nuking it. Besides that, try to rein in your pottymouth a little, you will find that people will be more willing to engage with you.
I have seen and personally know far too many people to whom it is just another boost in their Family Allowance or an increase to their welfare cheques ... I won't even start on all the women running around having babies just try and 'keep their man' o_0
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Yes, says me. My fuking opinion. Yours sucks.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Yeah, we need a lot of vegetarians to compensate for that incredibly huge, selfish carbon footprint.
Believe me, it's not vegetarians who make all the difference in terms of carbon footprints. Like, be a vegetarian all you want, but that's not a very good reason given the evidence.
Well, the dad is a train driver enabling many people to make their journeys without cars so I guess it balances out.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
We're constantly being told in the West that we need immigrants because we're having too few children and that our populations are below replacement levels.
Ever think of adopting a girl after say the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th boy?
She probably wouldn't be eligible. Suprising amount of rules around adoption. Load More Replies...
Indeed. In the UK, friends were made clear very quickly it wasn't going to happen unless one of them gave up their job, and strongly preferably she (senior lecturer) if not he (full professor). Who cares their colleagues in similar situations are raising their (own) kids no problem.
Nowhere in the article does it say that she was trying for a girl. A lot of the in-article commenters assume that too, and the use of "finally" in the title sure implies it, but reading through it really sounds like she just wanted a lot of kids.
Adoption is too hard in many places. It's both faster and easier to go for IVF or get a surrogate to bring a new child into this world than it is to adopt a child in desperate need of a home. I get that it needs to be strict to ensure kids don't go to bad parents but come on......
Not sure if there's a religious aspect here, but a lot of fundies won't adopt because they believe that children can biologically inherit their parents' sin.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Ever thought of minding your own business and not judging a woman for having as many kids as she wants?
The dad tho he looks like he lost his will to live like 4 boys ago and they just kept sucking the life out of him each time she had another.
True but he could have done something about it, lol. Load More Replies...
Very true, technically he is 1/2 a contributor........I was gonna say "or is he" but all the kids look EXACTLY the same so he is definitely a contributor lol
Each time she had another? it takes two to get pregnant, if he didn't want any more he should have put a knot in it.
Looks like the second tallest kid had a lot of life sucked out of him too lol
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
That is just mean.
So much breeding, this is why the planet is in collapse.
The planet isn’t about to collapse. The planet it will survive. That said, the megafauna (elephants, rhinos, polar bears, etc.) are pretty much screwed—and it’s because the ZPG movement (Zero Population Growth) of the late 1960s/early 1970s came and went without really effectively getting their message out there. Prior to the 1960s, birth control was unreliable and frequently not used at all; however, The Pill changed all that. That was the genesis of the Sexual Revolution, and birth rates did go down, but not nearly enough. I’m glad I’ll be dead when things get really bad; I really don’t understand how people can bring children into a world of increasing scarcity.
And the reasoning behind this would be...? I'm not trolling here, I'm genuinely asking.
If this was the norm, it would take one single generation for the total population to rise fivefold. Probably more like quadrupling, since not everybody can or want to have children. It is bad enough to add another billion in a generation.
Hi, Orillion. I absolutely agree with you. I did not imply that this is common at all, I tried to answer his question in a way that would also make people think. Later, I checked what I said about adding another billion in a generation. I am troubled to say that I was off the mark by a fair bit. Right now, we will become a billion more much faster than a generation. To Full Name, if much more people than now chose to not have children, and many more would opt for fewer children, then the chances for longtime survival of humans, as well as an awful lot of other species on our little planet would increase greatly.
@Monika Soffronow I'm fairly confident in saying families like this are, and will always be, extreme outliers. This is not a case where people will read this and go "we should have 11 kids too".
The ignorance in the responses to your question are astounding. Do these people also criticize people that have zero children? If we all had no children then the population would go to zero in one lifetime.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Who are you to say? Some people want 0 and they wanted 11. Plus they can afford them!
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
If you can't figure this out on your own then I really don't feel like helping you.
Why
Overpopulation is a thing! Stupid, selfish and downright evil!
They're rank amateurs compared to America's Reality TV right-wing-extreme-Christian baby factory known as the Duggars.
Apparently the entire country of India also didn't read that memo!
The fertility rate for India in the year 2017: about 2.3 children born per woman of childbearing age. According to the World Health Organization, 2.1 is the replacement rate.
this!! thank you
And what does that have to do with you and this day and age?
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
It's her body and her choice.
But it's not her planet
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
In your opinion.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
People can have as many children as they want what gives YOU the right to say its "utterly ridiculous". It's THEIR choice.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Says who? You? It doesn't make any less sense for this woman to have ten children then it does for anyone to not have children. For all the talk of pro-choice in society some of you @sshats sure do like to sh1t on the people who decide to embrace having children. Get lost.
Its not about having children, it is about having 11 (eleven) children! Why do you make so many? Do you think the kids are happy wearing their older brothers' clothes and not having any attention from their mother being bussy with the latest baby? Do you honestly think it is a good idea? Also - the Earth is overpopulated and soon we will have to restrict ourselves to having one child - why she gets to have 11 - how are her genes better than anyone else?
Victoria, would you defend my right to use nuclear weapons? No, I did not think so. Not everything is, or should be, on the "my-choice-if-I-want-to spectrum. At the present moment, we, as a species, by means of overpopulating it, are destroying our one and only planet as efficiently as if were nuking it. Besides that, try to rein in your pottymouth a little, you will find that people will be more willing to engage with you.
I have seen and personally know far too many people to whom it is just another boost in their Family Allowance or an increase to their welfare cheques ... I won't even start on all the women running around having babies just try and 'keep their man' o_0
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Yes, says me. My fuking opinion. Yours sucks.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Yeah, we need a lot of vegetarians to compensate for that incredibly huge, selfish carbon footprint.
Believe me, it's not vegetarians who make all the difference in terms of carbon footprints. Like, be a vegetarian all you want, but that's not a very good reason given the evidence.
Well, the dad is a train driver enabling many people to make their journeys without cars so I guess it balances out.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
We're constantly being told in the West that we need immigrants because we're having too few children and that our populations are below replacement levels.