So I hear it's baby number 5 for Jools and Jamie Oliver...!
Forgive me if you could care less but I am a sucker for a celebrity baby story and there's something especially fascinating about a celeb family going for party-of-seven status.
According to the Mail, Jools announced the news today and promptly showed up at a red carpet event with a baby bump very much in appearance.
I love that she managed to keep that quiet until the needs-must point.
The paper reports:
Jools has long spoken of her desire to add to her brood and a close friend of the family confirmed on Thursday that she is now 'thrilled' to be pregnant again with TV chef husband Jamie, 40. Speaking about the 41-year-old, a source told The Daily Mail: 'Jools is radiant and blooming for the fifth time. The baby is expected in August.'
So what I want to know is this. If money were no object and you could afford to have as many kids as you would like, how large a family would you choose?
It goes without saying, of course, that money isn't the only obstacle when it comes to having a large family. Plenty of us have fewer children than we would have chosen, had life turned out exactly as we'd have planned, but my question is really about whether we all secretly yearn for an 'impossibly' large family, or if the thought of a brood of five kids has some mums running for the hills? Would you go for number 5 at 41 like Jools?
Speaking personally, three is the magic number for me. Until my third baby came along, I never quite felt as though my baby-bearing years were completely 'done' with, and within hours of my youngest's arrival I had this unmistakable sense that everyone who was supposed to be here finally was. It's weird, but that feeling's stayed with me ever since and although I'll always be one of those women who get broody over babies and find myself regularly contemplating 'just one more...', I do genuinely feel as though my family is complete.
What about you? And if you'd really love a larger family, what's holding you back?