A sad story about terrible parenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps memory has deserted me, but I don't remember back when the Bethesda family with the triplets -- their house burned down because they had no smoke detectors -- I believe it was 2009 -- anyway, I don't remember a long discussion of their decision to have triplets, IVF, and so forth, and their other sexual practices. It just didn't seem relevant to their tragedy.

But that's BETHESDA. They DESERVE our compassion because they're from here. We don't care about rural folks from Louisiana. It cuts into our manufactured entertainment of making fun of them for their plight in life. Don't stop our fun now with your rational arguments.

If the deaths of their children could have been prevented by a simple installation of fire alarms, of course they are just as irresponsible as this woman. However, there is a difference in making 5 children which 3 or more men and bringing them into poverty, and bringing 3 into a stable home though IVF. Are you really that obtuse?

No, you are the obtuse one, plus some. Would it have made a difference if the woman had one child in Lousiana with the same outcome. Puh-leze, you are making excuses for your hypocrisy.

[Anonymous]

Ah yes....the fire started due to faulty wiring in their hot tub...no working smoke detectors...and the triplets were in crib tents which made it very difficult for the firefighters to rescue them. They ended up in intensive care.

Another sad story about terrible parenting.


But it led to an outpouring of support...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/05/AR2008120501830.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to the poster who says that 5 children by age 26 is normal outside eastern urban areas of the states, is that really true????

im somewhat willing to listen seeing as when i travel in the midwest people think im my child's grandmother (much better alternative than my other conclusion,which is i just look old).

I lived on the west coast (Orange County, San Diego County, and Los Angeles County) from the ages of 13-30, and I can tell you it was definitely not the "norm" amongst my peers. I had my first child at age 24, and was considered "young".

Oh yes, comparing San Diego, Los Angeles, and Washington DC gives a great perspective on life in rural Louisiana. Yep, that just about covers the whole middle part of the country.

The PP said it was normal outside eastern urban areas. Los Angeles is not an EASTERN urban area.

You must be pretty stupid if comparing Los Angeles and rural Louisiana makes sense to you.

I never said it made sense. A PP said outside of EASTERN areas. Los Angeles is not EAST COAST. You must be pretty stupid if you can't tell the difference between East and West.

[Anonymous]

This happens all the time in New Orleans. That's not rural La.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This happens all the time in New Orleans. That's not rural La.

Are you saying that Rayne, Louisiana is New Orleans. According to the news article, this tragedy happened in Rayne, not New Orleans.

[Anonymous]

Wait a minute. The triplets in Bethesda survived, didn't they?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait a minute. The triplets in Bethesda survived, didn't they?

So it must have been AWESOME parenting!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait a minute. The triplets in Bethesda survived, didn't they?

Which is a testament to the quality of their parents' vigilance!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps memory has deserted me, but I don't remember back when the Bethesda family with the triplets -- their house burned down because they had no smoke detectors -- I believe it was 2009 -- anyway, I don't remember a long discussion of their decision to have triplets, IVF, and so forth, and their other sexual practices. It just didn't seem relevant to their tragedy.

But that's BETHESDA. They DESERVE our compassion because they're from here. We don't care about rural folks from Louisiana. It cuts into our manufactured entertainment of making fun of them for their plight in life. Don't stop our fun now with your rational arguments.

If the deaths of their children could have been prevented by a simple installation of fire alarms, of course they are just as irresponsible as this woman. However, there is a difference in making 5 children which 3 or more men and bringing them into poverty, and bringing 3 into a stable home though IVF. Are you really that obtuse?

No, you are the obtuse one, plus some. Would it have made a difference if the woman had one child in Lousiana with the same outcome. Puh-leze, you are making excuses for your hypocrisy.

Of course it would have made a difference. one child would be dead instead of 4 (not that one is any less valuable than all 4 together). One unplanned pregnancy into poverty is a mistake, 5 is a lifestyle. And I'm saying this as an unwed, single mother. She obviously wasn't fit to have them or they wouldn't be dead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps memory has deserted me, but I don't remember back when the Bethesda family with the triplets -- their house burned down because they had no smoke detectors -- I believe it was 2009 -- anyway, I don't remember a long discussion of their decision to have triplets, IVF, and so forth, and their other sexual practices. It just didn't seem relevant to their tragedy.

But that's BETHESDA. They DESERVE our compassion because they're from here. We don't care about rural folks from Louisiana. It cuts into our manufactured entertainment of making fun of them for their plight in life. Don't stop our fun now with your rational arguments.

If the deaths of their children could have been prevented by a simple installation of fire alarms, of course they are just as irresponsible as this woman. However, there is a difference in making 5 children which 3 or more men and bringing them into poverty, and bringing 3 into a stable home though IVF. Are you really that obtuse?

No, you are the obtuse one, plus some. Would it have made a difference if the woman had one child in Lousiana with the same outcome. Puh-leze, you are making excuses for your hypocrisy.

Of course it would have made a difference. one child would be dead instead of 4 (not that one is any less valuable than all 4 together). One unplanned pregnancy into poverty is a mistake, 5 is a lifestyle. And I'm saying this as an unwed, single mother. She obviously wasn't fit to have them or they wouldn't be dead.

And if the family in Bethesda didn't have a malfunctioning hot tub and had a functioning fire alarm, maybe those kids would have been better off and wouldn't have wound up in critical condition and who knows how they are now. Terrible. Just seriously unfit.

[Anonymous]

Anybody who uses IVF is a Satanist. They should just accept that God's plan is that they aren't good enough to have babies. At all.

Nevermind using IVF to have THREE babies. At one time. My god, what disgusting consumerism. And how irresponsible. Who can take care of three babies at one time? Obviously not the Bethesda parents. If they had been good parents they would have had working fire alarms. Maybe if they didn't have so many babies they would have had the time, money and energy to get their fire alarms fixed.

disgusting lifestyle choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a super liberal. This seems like a sad tragedy, and there may be understandable (though not excusable) reasons the mom wasn't home. Perhaps not, too.

One way or another though this mother had more children than she could care for well. And it is frustrating that people don't stop having children when they are struggling to care for the ones they have. Being poor doesn't mean everything in life is out of your hands. I wouldn't even argue a poor person shouldn't have children, but I do think the number of kids she had and the conditions they were all living in suggests a reluctance to take appropriate responsibility for herself/life.

When people insist that a person should be exempt from criticism for certain life choices they've made because they are poor and black, that in and of itself is racist and patronizing. Young, poor, black women can make good choices for themselves, but this person didn't. (and lots of young, poor, white women make bad choices too...and rich white women...just in this case this person was black, and I think the unwillingness to hold her at all responsible for her life is it's own form of prejudice).

I am super conservative and I couldn't agree with you more. Very well stated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anybody who uses IVF is a Satanist. They should just accept that God's plan is that they aren't good enough to have babies. At all.

Nevermind using IVF to have THREE babies. At one time. My god, what disgusting consumerism. And how irresponsible. Who can take care of three babies at one time? Obviously not the Bethesda parents. If they had been good parents they would have had working fire alarms. Maybe if they didn't have so many babies they would have had the time, money and energy to get their fire alarms fixed.

disgusting lifestyle choice.

The decision to have the babies sleep in crib tents was actually very dangerous...the firemen commented that it wasted precious minutes in rescuing them...a real fire hazard and a terrible parenting decision. A lazy parenting decision since moving them to toddler beds (where the parents would have had to supervise them) would have been the right thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps memory has deserted me, but I don't remember back when the Bethesda family with the triplets -- their house burned down because they had no smoke detectors -- I believe it was 2009 -- anyway, I don't remember a long discussion of their decision to have triplets, IVF, and so forth, and their other sexual practices. It just didn't seem relevant to their tragedy.

But that's BETHESDA. They DESERVE our compassion because they're from here. We don't care about rural folks from Louisiana. It cuts into our manufactured entertainment of making fun of them for their plight in life. Don't stop our fun now with your rational arguments.

If the deaths of their children could have been prevented by a simple installation of fire alarms, of course they are just as irresponsible as this woman. However, there is a difference in making 5 children which 3 or more men and bringing them into poverty, and bringing 3 into a stable home though IVF. Are you really that obtuse?

No, you are the obtuse one, plus some. Would it have made a difference if the woman had one child in Lousiana with the same outcome. Puh-leze, you are making excuses for your hypocrisy.

Of course it would have made a difference. one child would be dead instead of 4 (not that one is any less valuable than all 4 together). One unplanned pregnancy into poverty is a mistake, 5 is a lifestyle. And I'm saying this as an unwed, single mother. She obviously wasn't fit to have them or they wouldn't be dead.

Yes you are so right. And that mom in Connecticut wasn't fit to be a mom, or her children would not be dead. How about that mom in Bethesda whose estranged husband kicked their son. She picked the wrong partenr. Darn, she obviously wasn't fit to be a mom, otherwise her son would not be dead. Do you hear how ridicuolus you sound. Perhaps she was not a fit parent, but it has nothing to do with her being impovished. Or, only educated women with a HHI over a certain amount allowed to be single parents. Perhaps you are not fit to be a parent. Who would knowinly raise a fatherless child. See how judgmental people can render a person's decison, you unfit parent, you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps memory has deserted me, but I don't remember back when the Bethesda family with the triplets -- their house burned down because they had no smoke detectors -- I believe it was 2009 -- anyway, I don't remember a long discussion of their decision to have triplets, IVF, and so forth, and their other sexual practices. It just didn't seem relevant to their tragedy.

But that's BETHESDA. They DESERVE our compassion because they're from here. We don't care about rural folks from Louisiana. It cuts into our manufactured entertainment of making fun of them for their plight in life. Don't stop our fun now with your rational arguments.

If the deaths of their children could have been prevented by a simple installation of fire alarms, of course they are just as irresponsible as this woman. However, there is a difference in making 5 children which 3 or more men and bringing them into poverty, and bringing 3 into a stable home though IVF. Are you really that obtuse?

No, you are the obtuse one, plus some. Would it have made a difference if the woman had one child in Lousiana with the same outcome. Puh-leze, you are making excuses for your hypocrisy.

Of course it would have made a difference. one child would be dead instead of 4 (not that one is any less valuable than all 4 together). One unplanned pregnancy into poverty is a mistake, 5 is a lifestyle. And I'm saying this as an unwed, single mother. She obviously wasn't fit to have them or they wouldn't be dead.

Yes you are so right. And that mom in Connecticut wasn't fit to be a mom, or her children would not be dead. How about that mom in Bethesda whose estranged husband kicked their son. She picked the wrong partenr. Darn, she obviously wasn't fit to be a mom, otherwise her son would not be dead. Do you hear how ridicuolus you sound. Perhaps she was not a fit parent, but it has nothing to do with her being impovished. Or, only educated women with a HHI over a certain amount allowed to be single parents. Perhaps you are not fit to be a parent. Who would knowinly raise a fatherless child. See how judgmental people can render a person's decison, you unfit parent, you.

killed