Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 11:17 AM ET, 01/ 3/2007

Celebrity Baby Boom

By Liz Kelly

Kutcher and Moore. (AP)

Demi Moore, 44, already has three children -- Rumer, 18, Scout, 15, and Tallulah, 12 -- with ex-husband Bruce Willis, but in the latest issue of Vanity Fair she said she definitely plans to have more kids with Ashton Kutcher, 28.

Says Moore in the article, "Once you hit three, where you're outnumbered, it's really, like, 'What's the difference between (three or) four or five?"

You gotta be punking me, right?

Wrong.

Forget contentious foreign adoptions and Scientology births, Moore and Kutcher could be part of a quietly growing celebrity trend: families big enough to run a small farm or recreate "The Sound of Music's" Von Trapp family singers.

Julia Roberts recently announced she's pregnant with baby number three, too, but she's got a ways to go before catching up with Mia Farrow -- who has presided over a family of 14 for some time -- or Mel Gibson, who has famously sired seven children (or is it eight?). Then there's Eddie Murphy, who has five children with ex-wife Nicole Mitchell and is facing a possible paternity suit with Scary Spice Melanie Brown. Angelina Jolie recently said she and Brad Pitt plan to add more kids to their quickly growing brood and Madonna and Guy Ritchie are reportedly at odds over Madge's desire to adopt another Malawian baby -- which would bring her total kid count up to four.

Are kids just the accessory du jour or is this the leading edge of a celebrity baby boom?

By Liz Kelly  | January 3, 2007; 11:17 AM ET
Categories:  Celebrities  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Morning Mix: Judge Sets Anna Nicole Smith Paternity Test Deadline
Next: Morning Mix: Cameron Diaz and Justin Timberlake Over?

Comments

I wonder when Paris and LiLo will start punting out some kids.

Posted by: not bluto | January 3, 2007 12:05 PM | Report abuse

What ever became of the crack baby craze of a decade or two ago? Do crack babies no longer exist, or is it that they're just not as stylish nowadays? I miss crack babies.

Posted by: Anonymous | January 3, 2007 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Must be nice to have so much love...and an army of assistants, nannies, tutors, cooks, personal trainers, and no worries about child care costs or 529 plans for college tuition.

Of course, in exchange your kids will likely write a tell-all book, end up on reality TV, flash the media sans-underwear, or perhaps do all of the above. In the grand scheme of things I'll take my own family, thank you very much.


Posted by: dc | January 3, 2007 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Demi's children are teenagers and they have a relationship with Bruce Willis. My guess is Ashton is tolerated because he is mommy's husband, but he will not have a fatherly relationship with Demi's daughters

If Ashton wants to have kids, he and Demi better find a surrogate or adopt.

Posted by: Lisa | January 3, 2007 12:55 PM | Report abuse

They're the newest accessory, the latest thing to do. It will escalate with Madge adopting an entire orphanage then Jolie adopting the entire country of Namibia. Then they'll have their own militias and be exchanging bazooka fire instead of PR barbs.

Posted by: Stick | January 3, 2007 1:08 PM | Report abuse

it's a trend. Yet another way to spend off their ridiculous excess of cash.

Posted by: alexandria | January 3, 2007 1:13 PM | Report abuse

it's a trend. Yet another way to spend off their ridiculous excess of cash.

Posted by: alexandria | January 3, 2007 1:15 PM | Report abuse

My understanding is that Ashton has a really great relationship with Demi's kids (they have some nickname for him that involves the word Daddy), so I don't think they they merely tolerate him. I think this situation is admirable - exes still get along and also get along with the new spouses (remember Bruce on That 70s Show?)

Posted by: Betty | January 3, 2007 1:43 PM | Report abuse

I would feel better about it if there weren't so many divorces in the mix, but I guess that is about the same as non-celebs.
As for Demi, yeah, probably having your household staff and private cosmetic surgeon helps with the baby decision. I am just waiting for Ash to start dating Demi's oldest daughter...speaking of Mia Farrow! Remember how it ended between her and Woody!

Posted by: Barb | January 3, 2007 1:43 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if the divorces do contribute to the phenomenon - can't guarantee that the spouse'll stick around, so might as well ensure that there'll be someone who has to stay and love you no matter what.

Posted by: hmm | January 3, 2007 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Oh my god, how horrible, people who can afford to have children are having them rather than being poor and expecting us to support them on welfare. Geez, Demi is terrible because she has money and wants to have kids. Isn't it a good thing she can afford them? If they are good parents, celebrities get to have as many children as they want, just like the rest of us. It is also their personal decision, just like the rest of us.

Posted by: ep | January 3, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Liz, I thought you were going to delete che's long winded EXTREMELY off topic messages? Or are you really che and that is why your bloggs always have she/he on them... I remember you put it up for vote and most wanted che deleted!

Posted by: M | January 3, 2007 4:53 PM | Report abuse

I agree, good for them if they want multiple kids. Hey as long as they can afford them, and don't have to live off my dime to support them.

Posted by: greatest | January 3, 2007 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Don't you think that people have, for the most part, always had as many children as they thought they could afford? The decline in American family sizes corresponds with the increase in daycare and higher education costs.

Posted by: WDC | January 3, 2007 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Sure, a few more people in the population with the Demi Moore and Julia Roberts genes can only be a good thing. However, as the very first poster pointed out, the idea of Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan reproducing is downright terrifying. So here's my idea: a new reality show that allows the nation to vote on which celeb is allowed to become pregnant next. Let's see, we can call it "Mattress-Dancing with the Stars."

Posted by: Snarky Squirrel | January 3, 2007 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Referring to children as "accessories": Liz, let me ask you this: when you're walking home from the bus stop, and you see your neighbor the part-time bookkeeper, do you whip out your camera phone, snap some pictures, and rush home to post them on the internet? Do you comment at length on the brand of her jeans, whether or not she look fatigued, who she might have been talking to on that cell phone? No. You probably wouldn't do that even if she were wearing a mini skirt with no undies. No one is interested in your neighbor, no matter what she's doing.

To reduce kids to the status of "accessories" just cause their parents are folks of interest is icky and cheap. Please try to keep the standards up here. I like to think you're better than the tabloids.

Posted by: CH | January 3, 2007 5:26 PM | Report abuse

I like snarky's idea. That would be cool: VOTING on who gets to reproduce. As per Catch-22's smiling Texan, we could also have "more votes for decent people".

Posted by: Bogota | January 3, 2007 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Having large families used to be the norm. I say, if you can afford it, go to town. Although, at 44, I don't think any baby they have will be genetically hers. (Hello, donor egg!)

Posted by: h3 | January 4, 2007 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Actually if I saw my neighbor sans underwear, I would definitely blog about it on the internet.

I don't have a problem with Demi and Ashton reproducing. I think its a natural thing for them to want, and it doesn't seem so staged like foreign adoptions just for the sake of it (Madonna, I'm talking to you).

Posted by: Laura | January 4, 2007 10:48 AM | Report abuse

In the western world, we've gone from worrying about overpopulation to wondering if there'll be enough kids to take care of us when we're old. So the stigma of a large family is evaporating.
I have two kids. I'd have more if my body, my schedule and my paycheck would support it.

Posted by: A mommy | January 4, 2007 1:25 PM | Report abuse

How about thinking about whether THE PLANET can support more kids? It's not all about you.

Posted by: J.M. | January 4, 2007 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Amen, J.M., amen. Not everything is about ourselves. As we have evolved as humans the one thing that appears to be short changed is our rational thinking. Yes, we are to reproduce and ensure that the lines of our species continues...but at what cost?

Posted by: AMG | January 4, 2007 4:39 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company