Octuplet mom: Can you justify that level of anger in public?

[Anonymous]

Isn't the more compelling question: why would someone who already has 6 children at home need even 1 more? What, raising 6 was not fulfilling enough? Wasn't challenging enough?

Whether a doctor implanted 1 embryo or 100, the idea of a actively undergoing fertility treatments when one already has 6 kids is nothing short of mental.

[Anonymous]

"Isn't the more compelling question: why would someone who already has 6 children at home need even 1 more? What, raising 6 was not fulfilling enough? Wasn't challenging enough?

Whether a doctor implanted 1 embryo or 100, the idea of a actively undergoing fertility treatments when one already has 6 kids is nothing short of mental. "

No not really. This would never have made news if she had given birth to one more even if it meant a total of seven. While its mind boggling for you or I to imagine having 7 kids it is not that rare in this country. There are women who keep having babies, there are women for religious reasons who keep having babies and some can support their families but many can not. There simply is not the same level as outrage because there are not eight at once. Eight at once would not have occurred without this doctor stepping in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay, I'm going to play devil's advocate here...

Should we then take the numerous kids that single moms today are having away from them and place them in adoptive homes too?

This octuplet mom has the support at least of her parents and a home to live in. She has an education but is not able to use it because she's caring for the kids now. Single moms with numerous kids in DC rarely have that kind of support or that kind of an education.

There was a family on TV with a couple who had 18 kids (they are religious and do not believe in birth control). Nobody is taking their children away. I doubt highly the father is able to support his kids, send his kids to college on just his income alone. Impossible. I'm sure they are receiving some degree of support. Why haven't we taken their children away?

Why are people looking to rip this mom of her parental rights and instead have helped other families with 8, 14, 18 kids? Is it really just because people are angry at the poor economic times and are looking to bash anyone who appears to be sucking off the system? If so, this is also hypocritical. What about every single person in the unemployment line. I'd like to know how far they got in their education? Do they have a PhD in chemical engineering and are still collecting unemployment insurance? Doubtful. More likely they scarcely have a degree and that is why they're in the unemployment insurance line...yes, sucking off the system too just like the octuplet mom. Had they completed their education, maybe majored in something that is in demand such as IT or medicine or engineering, nursing, or physical therapy they would not need to suck off the system. So how can they say their situation is vastly different from octuplet mom? I would rather my tax dollars go to supporting babies than grown adults who made bad decisions in not completing their education or majoring in areas not in demand by the market.

My grandmother had 12 children. My grandfather died when the kids were teenagers. But the vast majority of them still got a college education. Several got MBA's and PhD's also. She did this with community support. Some of these children, my uncles, are now community leaders and leaders in their occupation. They now donate to charities themselves and support veterans associations, march of dimes, cancer associations, etc...They are productive and giving adults. But the children were not split up from their mother. Instead, the community kept them together but simply provided help.

So before you think to terminate parental rights (done in the most heinous of circumstances such as a drug addict parent, exteme neglect) or talk about splitting the family up, look inyour ownhouse and ask if you have ever received any help from the system or if there are people in your back yard whose families should also be split up.

Honestly, you are misinformed. The family you referenced with 18 children is in fact self-supporting. Furthermore, whether or not a parent can afford to send a child/children to college doesn't play into the equation -- no one is calling for families to be split up because the parents can't come up with college tuition. Octuplet mom's parents are in foreclosure. They can't support her financially and aren't even behind her emotionally.

Why is it so hard to understand that people are pissed off because she had 8 at once when she couldn't even afford the six she already had? The delivery fee itself was more money than the average derelict mother in DC could ever dream of getting over the course of her lifetime. And at least her kids, being born one at a time, have a shot at being neurologically normal.


I'm deeply saddened by your post. I'm deeply saddened that people can be so consumed with venom towards a mother, despite her bad decision, that they refuse to do anything to help her children who will need the support of the community to survive. It is time to get over the hatred for the mother and focus on the children and their needs. So this is why I wanted to explore people's feelings about this situation. You seem to want to keep the hatred flowing, however.
Why are people so eager to explore the reasons for the backlash against octuplet mom? It's really not that complicated.

If I'm misinformed why does their family web site talk about the many reality TV shows they have had and still also have, capitalizing on their large family? Why does it mention they sold a book - about their large family also? They are very religious folk, so don't tell me their church did not help them at all. I just saw Mr. Duggar, the father, on TV yesterday as a matter of fact and he claimed to own 7 cars. In order to support 18 kids you'd have to make a ton of money. I'd like to know his salary and then to see who donated to build his house, and who is providing support to his family. So if he can have a web site, sell books, sell his family on many reality TV shows why can't Nadya Suleman do the same without the criticism? Its hypocrisy to criticize Naya and not this family.

Their family is facing foreclosure like millions of Americans are right now. Nadya's pregnancy was 7 months. Her babies have been in the hospital almost 1 month or so now. The mother's failure to make payments apparently started within this year. Have you not considered the possibility that she began invitro BEFORE the financial difficulties of the family?

Nadya's family is an extended family. In Arab or eastern cultures it isn't unusual at all to live with your parents or with your inlaws and the finances to all be handled together...regardless of any individual family member's financial standing.

Are you telling me that the vast majority of moms born to single moms in the urban DC areas are healthy? Tell that to the NICU doctors in DC who are caring for the drug babies, a not so uncommon problem there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Isn't the more compelling question: why would someone who already has 6 children at home need even 1 more? What, raising 6 was not fulfilling enough? Wasn't challenging enough?

Whether a doctor implanted 1 embryo or 100, the idea of a actively undergoing fertility treatments when one already has 6 kids is nothing short of mental. "

No not really. This would never have made news if she had given birth to one more even if it meant a total of seven. While its mind boggling for you or I to imagine having 7 kids it is not that rare in this country. There are women who keep having babies, there are women for religious reasons who keep having babies and some can support their families but many can not. There simply is not the same level as outrage because there are not eight at once. Eight at once would not have occurred without this doctor stepping in.

I agree with this poster. There's a family in our neighborhood with 6 children. Having 6 or 7 kids is not that unusual. It's not up to others to judge who can afford what.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The difference with the Octomom situation is that she put the health of 8 tiny babies in serious jeopardy by doing what she did.

THe alternative would have been to:
1) Destroy the embryo's but due to her belief that embryos are life, she did not want to do that.
2) Implant only 2 at a time - she did not want to freeze the embryo's because the thawing out process destroys many embryo's

Would it have been better to have those embroyo's destroyed or frozen and run the risk of having them not survive the thawing out process?

Yes, she put them in jeopardy but so does the 38-40 year old mom who chooses to have a child with her increased liklihood of genetic disorders and chromosomal abnormalities, so does the mother who already has one special needs child such as with autism but chooses to have more children, so does any mother who has a direct relative with a disease or disorder severe enough to require state aid such as autism, but still opts to have children, so does the adult who regularly lives off of hamburgers and french fries and then gets sick with cancer or diabetes without decent medical insurance.

CNN just reported last night that the babies are actually healthy btw. You can't say until the children are about 2 whether they have serious neurological disorders. They may have issues, but maybe none severe enough that would make the child a dependent of the state.

First, yes, it would have been better if she had donated the embryos or given them to science so that they could help someone else. I have done invitro and would never donate my embryo's to other couples due to our personal religious convictions. So what one person would do doesn't generally apply to everyone else. Religious convictions, personal beliefs must be taken into account.

Second, 1, if not more, of her kids ALREADY HAS AUTISM (another one of them definitely has some other kind of disorder that qualifies her for state aid). Your defense about not having more kids once people have one with autism definitely falls apart here. No, in the last interview with her she said ONE child has autistic-like symptoms and this is not the same as autism. I know because DS has autistic like symptoms also but it has been confirmed with a neurologist, psychiatrist, devel pediatirican, everyone that it is not autism. It is Sensory Processing Disorder. It can mimic autism for those who don't know the difference. And DS is gifted and will never require state assistance. Autism is a very disorder and will almost always require intervention immediately. Autism is sort of like pregnancy. One can not be 'a little pregnant' and one can not be a little autistic. Either you are on the autism spectrum or you're not. This is what was told to us by a nationally renowned child psychiatrist. Besides, there are thousands and thousands of kids being dx with autism in much smaller families than Nadya's. It is a miracle that only one of her six kids only has autistic like symptoms considering that 1 out of 100 boys are being dx with autism these days.

I agree with those who say these babies should be adopted out to mentally stable people who can afford to love and take care of babies the way they deserve. This situation is very different than inner-city single moms or families with 10+ kids.

NO it's not because inner city moms always seem to be using state assistance as are many families with much larger families.

[Anonymous]

This woman is insane. No one is criticizing the parents who have 18 kids or couples like John and Kate because they provide for their children and live within their means. This woman has no job, no income, nothing! Now there are stories that her house in foreclosure. She is being selfish for continuing to have kids simply because she wasn’t loved as a child.

It’s terrible that taxpayers have to support this nut job. It’s even more despicable that she is asking for donations when just a few days ago she was caught in video shopping at Nordstrom!! The state should take her children away

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s terrible that taxpayers have to support this nut job. It’s even more despicable that she is asking for donations when just a few days ago she was caught in video shopping at Nordstrom!! The state should take her children away

You poor soul. Tax payers money is going into so many much more frilovous things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think none of this is anyone's business. If this woman wants to have 4, 8 or 20 kids, mind your own business. If you want to contribute some money to help her out, great. If not, don't. I highly doubt anyone on this dicussion board is the perfect parent, or has perfect mental health--most of what I'm reading here sounds incredibly judgmental, superior and lacks compassion. How about backing off, and not casting the first stone?

In this woman's case, it is everyone's business because everyone will be paying for the support and survival of her and her kids from a statewide and national level. Their birth comes at a particularly vulnerable moment in the economy when people are losing jobs, running out of unemployment benefits, are under general financial strain and they were productive contributing members of society.

Op's thoughts of "What's done is done now let's help her out" is not a solution either. Why? So that some other nut job can go out and have 8, 9, or 10 litter of babies at once to get their 15 minutes of fame and a lifetime on the government dole? Don't even drag single mom's into this equation. It's apples and oranges. Single mom's aren't crazy or dumb enough to have a litter of babies to collect welfare. Nadya is not the same as Brangelina or the Duggars with 18 kids; I don't approve of the Duggars' 18 but at least they took 18 years to create them.

[Anonymous]

PP, of course it is, but that doesn't mean that it should be going to this situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I agree with many pps that the babies should be taken away and given to infertile couples who have been waiting for years to raise a child or other functional families. We have too many people in society who can't have kids and should and far too many who have kids and shouldn't.

YIKES YIKES YIKES YIKES YIKES! Why are you so scary? Do you really want to give the state this much authority, to go taking people's babies away if mom for some reason seems unfit? What happens when the standards of fitness stray from what you think is okay and into an area where YOU might not seem fit? Seriously, YIKES! Think before you type!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s terrible that taxpayers have to support this nut job. It’s even more despicable that she is asking for donations when just a few days ago she was caught in video shopping at Nordstrom!! The state should take her children away

You poor soul. Tax payers money is going into so many much more frilovous things.

Yeah, seriously. Maybe the state should take THIS poster's children away and maybe her ovaries too, since she's such a hateful person. I need to stop viewing this thread and others like it. I feel so sorry for most of you mean-spirited souls. I hope you all aren't serious about having the state take people's children from them unless there is abuse. Who are you to say that poverty is tantamount to unfit mothering? What happens if your religion one day becomes taboo and cause for unfit parenting? Or your line of work? Willing to allow the state to seize kids so easily in this case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, of course it is, but that doesn't mean that it should be going to this situation.

See paragraph 2, it paves the way for the next nut job as "What's done is done, so I will get help too". Everybody needs to know that it is not going to be such an easy way out with public assistance for umpteen babies/kids as far as the public is concerned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also love this woman's distorted sense of reality. What about when she said "this is only a temporary situation. When I get out of school I will be able to support them all." Is she stupid, delusional? When you get our of school Nadya at most you will make $50k a year. Which is NOTHING in comparision to what it will take to support these kids. What about those student loans you are using right now? Are you not going to pay those back? Who is going to watch 14 kids while you go to school? I mean seriously, we have one child, make considerably more than NS and I still feel stretched at times.

If you are stretched, then don't donate to NS. But people who do have wealth should and likely will donate to her. I have heard she has about $400,000 worth of donations already set aside forher children. People will separate the issue of Nadia and her children. Her children will need help and many people have big hearts for helping children. If I had more money I would donate myself.

One day any one of us can end up needing state support of some kind. Perhaps it will be when we are retired. Perhaps it will be when we lose our jobs. Perhaps it will be when grandma comes over to care for our kids so that we can work. In some way we are getting the help we need from others.

Wow. Want to send some of that cash my way?
Also: Who's to say she's actually going to spend that money on her kids?

[Anonymous]

Went searching....

Octuplet mom Nadya Suleman was spotted Wednesday in California shopping for video games and was captured on film checking out the Nintendo Wii and its accessories. The Wii retails for about $250. The controllers she was eye cost about $40. If she buys one for all 14 kids, that will add up to about $560.

The Los Angeles Times, however, is reporting that Suleman gets $490 a month in food stamps and another $600 in disability payments for three of her older children who suffer from ADHD, a speech impediment and autism.

The San Francisco Social Security Administration also told the paper that a single parent like Suleman with disabled kids could qualify for up to $2,900 a month in state and federal help.

Reporting by Daily News Staff Writer Carrie Melago and Lauren Johnston.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Los Angeles County property records indicate the Suleman house went into mortgage default on Feb. 9 after non-payment for 10 months. Suleman, 33, is also without a job and receiving food stamps, yet she still thought having octuplets through in vitro fertilization was a great idea? Suleman said she wanted a huge family <i>“to make up for the isolation she said she always felt as a child.”</i>
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hahahahaha she's pursuing a masters degree in (wait for it....) <b>COUNSELING.</b> According to an interview she gave on the today show with Anne Curry.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
In that same interview, she claimed she wasn't on welfare and didn't want to get on welfare.

Surprise surprise....she's on welfare now.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490269,00.html

"In her view these are just payments made for people with legitimate needs and are not, in her view, welfare," Furtney said. "She just believes that there are programs for people with needs and she and her children qualify for some of them."
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kate Gosselin of Jon and Kate Plus Eight appeared on the [Dr. Phil] show to talk about the hardships of raising multiples. She told Dr. Phil that it took a team of 50 volunteers a week to care for the sextuplets during the first year. Kate Goslin said she is very organized and determined and is worried that Nadya Suleman will not receive the help she needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Kate Goslin said she is very organized and determined and is worried that Nadya Suleman will not receive the help she needs.

The care Nadya needs is institutionalization. Really.

How do you know she won't use some of that $400K for another round of in vitro?