Octuplet mom rant

decides2dream · February 2009

tybird wrote:

_Crazy_Mary_ wrote:

So we, the taxpayers, are paying for her 14 children to be born and probably live off the system until who-knows-when-possibly-forever.

The Feds only pay for up to seven children....so she won't be getting government checks for half of her brood.

so the children suffer for this woman's utter selfishness. besides which, most multiples have numerous halth/developmental problems....so more suffering for this woman's selfishness. i seriously cannot believe a doctor would offer service to this woman for this purpose. i am all for women having children, even single women, if they choose to AND can afford to support said children. i think it's utterly criminal, b/c really....how many two parent families can afford that many children? not a lot. so to allow this woman to undergo this procedure and not selectively reduce the # of embryos, etc.....i just don't see how it's allowable. it takes the idea of in vitro too far, waaaayyyy too far imo.

and...

redrock wrote:

Why even implant one? She had 6 kids already for christ's sake! What kind of doctor would even consider IVF in her case?

EXACTLY!

norm · February 2009

JB811 wrote:

No wonder why California is in trouble, she is getting almost $500 a month in food stamps. What a screwed up state.

california is the only state with welfare?? that's a new one on me :roll:

Cosmo · February 2009

cornnifer wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

I just don't want to see this shit rewarded with a bullshit 'Reality T.V.' deal. It'll just convince the next shithead mom that it could be her big break.

i agree. The question i have is where does the blame lie; with the networks that reward this behavior, the mothers (and fathers) for taking advantage of it, or our fucked up culture for our seemingly insatiable appetite for this type of programming? Let's face it, the networks probably wouldn't keep pumping this shit out if the ratings weren't so damned high.

...
You are right... Anyone who watches these reality television shows about idiots and psychos shares the blame. If there wasn't people watching, there wouldn't be these types of shows and there wouldn't be any incentive for idiot people to do stupid shit to gain notoriety.
Turn off the goddamn T.V.

AmentsChick · February 2009

Cosmo wrote:

I hope Pampers doesn't give her free diapers... I hope General Mills does not give her free food... I hope Ford does not give her a free mini-van... these are the things she is shooting for along with the publicity and possibility of a made for T.V. movie right deal.
Make the fucking doctor that implanted her pay for some of the costs of these kids... he is the surrogate Father in this case.

I couldn't agree more!!!!!!!

JaneNY · February 2009

It is extremely irresponsible, the whole thing. That woman was indulging HERSELF. She already has 6 to take care of. At first I was thinking along the lines of who am I to tell someone else how many children to have, but when I found out the circumstances (she already has 6, unmarried, public assistance), I changed my thinking. My first concern would be for the children. I have had 2 children, one at a time, 4 years apart, and each of them kept me plenty busy as a baby, and I stayed home when they were little. The thought of 8 screaming at the same time, 8 sets of diapers to change, 8 mouths to feed, 8 baths to give makes me absolutely shudder. Humans weren't meant to have that many young at the same time, or we'd have 8 breasts on our abdomens like cats, dogs and some other mammals. We only got 2 ya know?

bigeye21 · February 2009

JaneNY wrote:

Humans weren't meant to have that many young at the same time, or we'd have 8 breasts on our abdomens like cats, dogs and some other mammals. We only got 2 ya know?

Well put.

Cosmo · February 2009

bigeye21 wrote:

JaneNY wrote:

Humans weren't meant to have that many young at the same time, or we'd have 8 breasts on our abdomens like cats, dogs and some other mammals. We only got 2 ya know?

Well put.

...
Man... if women had 8 tits... I wouldn't know what to do. I mean... I'm overwhelmed when i get to play with two... I'd go crazy and my head would explode like that Nazi guy in 'Raiders Of The Lost Ark'.

_ · February 2009

I'm not defending this woman at all and I understand everyone saying it was an irresponsible decision, but I still feel the need to mention that we need to be careful when we start talking about actually controlling women's fertility. It's a slippery slope. (I know, this is just a message board.)

redrock · February 2009

scb wrote:

.... I still feel the need to mention that we need to be careful when we start talking about actually controlling women's fertility. It's a slippery slope. (I know, this is just a message board.)

But isn't IVF in a way a control of fertility? Not in saying you can or you can't from a moral (or dictatorial) point of view, but more from a physical/medical point of view. I.e., your body says 'no you can't conceive children for various reasons', you/the medical profession say 'Hey body... I have control over you and whatever you say, these doctors can go over your head and make me conceive. Thus control over a woman's fertility. Then all the moral/ethical implications surface. A bit far fetched, maybe, but still.

Enkidu · February 2009

If I were a stronger person I wouldn't look on Huffington or follow this crazy bitch at all. But I just saw this:

The octuplets were born nine weeks prematurely but appear relatively healthy. Their names have a Biblical theme: Noah, Jonah, Jeremiah, Josiah, Isaiah, Maliyah, Makai and Nariyah. All share the middle name Angel and the last name Solomon.

_ · February 2009

redrock wrote:

scb wrote:

.... I still feel the need to mention that we need to be careful when we start talking about actually controlling women's fertility. It's a slippery slope. (I know, this is just a message board.)

But isn't IVF in a way a control of fertility? Not in saying you can or you can't from a moral (or dictatorial) point of view, but more from a physical/medical point of view. I.e., your body says 'no you can't conceive children for various reasons', you/the medical profession say 'Hey body... I have control over you and whatever you say, these doctors can go over your head and make me conceive. Thus control over a woman's fertility. Then all the moral/ethical implications surface. A bit far fetched, maybe, but still.

Yes, I guess it's kind of like controlling your fertility with contraceptive pills/devices. But that's not the kind of control to which I was referring. In the cases of contraception and IVF, medicine helps women control their own fertility. I was warning more against anything that would take control away from the woman and place it in the hands of society/politics, ya know?

redrock · February 2009

scb wrote:

I was warning more against anything that would take control away from the woman and place it in the hands of society/politics, ya know?

True, there is a danger, but once you start talking ethics, etc. there is already some control in place, whether moral or by law. That goes for other medical procedures as well. It's a very grey area. But when you see something like this - 6 kids with first IVF, 8 with second IVF, you start asking yourself questions. Clearly the IVF clinic/doctor did not adhere to the guidelines (rules? law?) of only a couple of eggs to be implanted. Was the doctor right to do this (can one assume at the request of the mother?), at the potential expense of the mother's and babies' health?

But then again... would a refusal to do so be an affront to freedom of choice (the mother's)?

blackredyellow · February 2009

JaneNY wrote:

The thought of 8 screaming at the same time, 8 sets of diapers to change, 8 mouths to feed, 8 baths to give makes me absolutely shudder.

Yeah... i can't imagine even two people logistically being able to keep up with 8 babies on the change/feed/nap routine in the first couple of months.

Who Princess · February 2009

The whole situation is nuts and I just feel so sorry for those 8 babies who didn't ask to be born and wonder what kind of life they can possibly have.

_ · February 2009

redrock wrote:

scb wrote:

I was warning more against anything that would take control away from the woman and place it in the hands of society/politics, ya know?

True, there is a danger, but once you start talking ethics, etc. there is already some control in place, whether moral or by law. That goes for other medical procedures as well. It's a very grey area. But when you see something like this - 6 kids with first IVF, 8 with second IVF, you start asking yourself questions. Clearly the IVF clinic/doctor did not adhere to the guidelines (rules? law?) of only a couple of eggs to be implanted. Was the doctor right to do this (can one assume at the request of the mother?), at the potential expense of the mother's and babies' health?

But then again... would a refusal to do so be an affront to freedom of choice (the mother's)?

Ever-evolving medical technology has sure given us a lot to think about, and I'm not ready to take a stand things such as IVF just yet. My point is just that as we do consider these things we need to keep in mind that we want to move forward, not backward to the days when it was completely unacceptable for single women to be mothers, for instance. As for the question of whether the doctor was right to do this at the potential expense of the mother's and babies' health, I'll have to leave that up to the medical community to decide.

Fahka · February 2009

one is too much these days.. fn 14? Thats just stupid.. and why would a single mom have so many damned kids? Most couples can't even afford enough for their kids... I feel sorry for the grandparents who probably do most of the tuff stuff.

Cosmo · February 2009

scb wrote:

redrock wrote:

scb wrote:

I was warning more against anything that would take control away from the woman and place it in the hands of society/politics, ya know?

True, there is a danger, but once you start talking ethics, etc. there is already some control in place, whether moral or by law. That goes for other medical procedures as well. It's a very grey area. But when you see something like this - 6 kids with first IVF, 8 with second IVF, you start asking yourself questions. Clearly the IVF clinic/doctor did not adhere to the guidelines (rules? law?) of only a couple of eggs to be implanted. Was the doctor right to do this (can one assume at the request of the mother?), at the potential expense of the mother's and babies' health?

But then again... would a refusal to do so be an affront to freedom of choice (the mother's)?

Ever-evolving medical technology has sure given us a lot to think about, and I'm not ready to take a stand things such as IVF just yet. My point is just that as we do consider these things we need to keep in mind that we want to move forward, not backward to the days when it was completely unacceptable for single women to be mothers, for instance. As for the question of whether the doctor was right to do this at the potential expense of the mother's and babies' health, I'll have to leave that up to the medical community to decide.

...
Wholeheartedly agree... As a whole... we need to steer clear of legislation that would restrict us a of a Choice to use the new and emerging technologies and concentrate on the moral and ethical questions raised by its use (and abuse). Like, just because this one crazy lady did this, it does not mean we should abolish all future procedures. We need to put moral and ethical decisions in play.

so-much-clearer · February 2009

Cosmo wrote:

scb wrote:

Ever-evolving medical technology has sure given us a lot to think about, and I'm not ready to take a stand things such as IVF just yet. My point is just that as we do consider these things we need to keep in mind that we want to move forward, not backward to the days when it was completely unacceptable for single women to be mothers, for instance. As for the question of whether the doctor was right to do this at the potential expense of the mother's and babies' health, I'll have to leave that up to the medical community to decide.

...
Wholeheartedly agree... As a whole... we need to steer clear of legislation that would restrict us a of a Choice to use the new and emerging technologies and concentrate on the moral and ethical questions raised by its use (and abuse). Like, just because this one crazy lady did this, it does not mean we should abolish all future procedures. We need to put moral and ethical decisions in play.

I think most people would be happy with just a restriction on how many embryos can be implanted at a time. At a minimum, IVF seekers need to be put through the same amount of paperwork and scrutiny adoptive parents get.

Heatherj43 · February 2009

I think a psychiatric exam should be given and a look into their psych background, especially for a woman with 6 very young children at home, no father, and no means of support, living with her mother. But, I think all people getting embyro implants, or whatever thye call it, needs a psych eval.

even flow - question mark · February 2009

_Crazy_Mary_ wrote:

I'm not surprised she's had plastic surgery. She has that creeper-fake-face look.

I was going to post the same thing. Judging by the plastic you can tell it is all about "me".

Octuplet mom rant

Comments

Categories