[chachaheels]

Multiple birth pregnancies are dangerous for mother and child alike. Anyone who knowinlgy chooses to have 8 plus children without the financial resources? People can afford the fertility treatment, but then they can't afford to cover the costs of subsequently raising the children.

I, for one, do not feel personally exploited by this woman. I simply find this story to be highly suspicious. Something about this story stinks to high heaven. And for good reason. This woman could not afford to feed the children she already had, yet she somehow found thousands and thousands of dollars to pay for IVF over and over and over again. How does that happen? What is the real story here?

Doctors who specialize in fertility treatments are the most highly paid doctors in the world. Each treatment is thousands of dollars, and it takes many before people end up pregnant.

So where does a Nadya Suleman get the money to even think about IVF--and end up being the "first" miracle mother of octuplets?

Or, like the Duggans (who made a killing themselves), all living in a trailer with 3 previous babies before creating the "medical miracle" of seven children? Where do they find the means to have access to these treatments? There is no way either group would have been given the money for them via public funds.

Something tells me Nadya Suleman was a marketing fantasy that temporarily backfired, but only where she herself was concerned. After all this dies down, her fertility specialists will be very busy capitalizing on other emotionally desperate wannabe parents, from everywhere in the world, and those patients will bring lots and lots of cash.
Suleman and her children aren't going to have such a happy time of it, now that Oprah won't get her big corporate friends to supply endless diapers and a new home built by Ty Pennington and Sears and new computers from Bill Gates and baby clothes from the Gap and books from Oprah's publishing empire and lots of education funding for the babies from Harvard University or any other university looking for a promotional free-for-all.

And, yes, this is all distraction from the real mess that's out there and won't be fixed anytime soon. Lots of financiers and CEOs with bonuses from bail-out money and war criminals and doctors should be lining the prison cells, it seems to me, but they just keep getting more and more money, less and less media scrutiny.

[rudderlesschild]

For the record, I'm feelin' mighty crotchety today.

Re: "choice". I think many feminists have kind of a knee-jerk reaction when it comes to all things reproductive. Yes, it's a delicate balance we hope to preserve. But I can't get behind any reflexive defense of ANY woman's choice to do ANYTHING she wants with eight (or fourteen) separate human lives - as if our criticism of Suleman or the Duggars or any other one-woman population explosion will lead to the immediate convening of some Government Uterine Affairs Committee. Someone upthread in the Bitch comments asked (paraphrasing wildly here) - if this woman had chosen, instead of IVF, to spend her saved thousands on a yacht or at the blackjack tables in Vegas, would anyone be so concerned with defending her precious "choice"?

If anything, "choices" like these only strengthen the position of those who don't believe women can be trusted with agency over their own bodies.

My own issue with her actions has nothing to do with reproductive rights, Reagan, race, or villagers in Nicaragua. My issue is that she is clearly emotionally unwell and, as such, is not even in any position to raise her first six children without massive parental and government assistance. Throw in the risk to life and limb faced by eight preemies and the questionable ethics of the doctor who agreed to implant six or seven embryos to begin with... for fuck's sake.

Ignore any moral or legal questions, and you're still left with STUPID.

I live in CA. Half the people I know have lost their jobs over the past month. The ones who've managed to keep theirs are facing mandatory furloughs and the scaling-back of benefits.

I am being personally exploited by this woman.

[culturehandy]

I agree with RV. This could be a family that had many children already, couldn't feed them but could afford IVF and I'd still be asking WTF is going on.

[roseviolet]

I don't like the way words like "we" and "everyone" are being casually tossed around in here and in that post on Bitch. A quick read through this thread proves that there are a number of different opinions & positions on this issue.

I, for one, do not feel personally exploited by this woman. I simply find this story to be highly suspicious. Something about this story stinks to high heaven. And for good reason. This woman could not afford to feed the children she already had, yet she somehow found thousands and thousands of dollars to pay for IVF over and over and over again. How does that happen? What is the real story here?

To me, her marital status is not the issue. The color of her skin is not the issue. I am simply concerned by the huge contradictions in the whole story.

[vixen_within]

indeed prophecy grrl.

i love how everyone feels personally exploited by nadya suleman. i'm not saying she's beyond reproach, certainly not, but the type and amount of fury is amazing and interesting in itself.

prophecy grrl thanks for the article! Bitch always comes through, they're like a clearing house for cogent analysis. I've been looking for something like this.

[zoya]

if 7 babies aren't enough for you, and you think you need 8 more to feel love? it's time for you to see a head doctor.

That is exactly my unease with this whole thing. I don't think the media is making a martyr of her - I take issue with the fact that they are so ga ga over her that no one has brought up exactly the above. Hell, I'd question a friend who had two kids and told me she was having a third for the same reasons Nadya Suleman says she is having babies. I don't think that trying to fill some sort of hole in your (clearly damaged) emotional health is a very good reason to have a child.

[prophecy_grrl]

I *do* find her actions abhorrent - her desperate need to have all these children, while simultaneously not seeming to care about their health or well-being, the obvious media whoring that's going on now. Reluctantly, I will say that her flippant abuse of government aid is distasteful, but really, I don't have a huge problem with that (that's an entirely different discussion, though). Student loans are not give-aways; she's only hurting herself by taking on all that debt and it's incredibly rare to be able to include student loans in bankruptcy claims.

Here's my beef with this whole situation - she has become a scapegoat and a distraction (if this thread is any measure of the national opinion) for our real problems in this country. A lot of what I am hearing comes awfully close to the old welfare queen trope of the Reagan years. This is an extreme case to be sure, but people on public aid did not cause the economic crisis, nor are they exacerbating it. It was caused by deregulating (oh look, Reagan again) Wall St. and the banking industry and the greed of major corporations (kind of like the ones who own all the major media outlets) - all of whom have our elected officials in their pockets. The same elected officials who look out for corporate interests over ours, who've watered down Obama's stimulus bill to the point of being unrecognizable. But I guess that's not as interesting or sensational as Nadya Suleman.

She is courting media attention, but they are still *choosing* to report on it. I think we've seen enough media whoring celebrities self destruct to know that you can simultaneously seek media attention and be victimized by it. We're obviously talking about a very sick woman here.

I think the best course of action at this point is to *ignore it.* Let's get pissed off about the stuff that matters.

ETA: a really good blog post from Bitch today (supporting my arguments) and some really good comments that both refute and support.

[girltrouble]

*vomits*

not to be rude vixen, although i know i am, i don't buy that story. if she was a widow, i'd still be disgusted. she's got what 7 other kids? why the fuck does she need even one more? i loathe the duggans, i detest jon and kate and all of the other INSIPID COOING that happens every time some idiot inlists a doctor into helping them feed their egos and lust for fame via multiple childbirth. i really don't give a fuck if they are married, if they are single if they are part platypus. kitty had a highschool friend who is on baby 6. she's so stupid as to take the pope's word as gold, and like her sister (on baby 8), her uterus is all fucked up, and can't support having another baby, and her husband can't support their family due to an injury. my issue is the irresponsibility of having large families in this day and age. i talk just as much shit about them as i would about nadya. but i think she's worse. if 7 babies aren't enough for you, and you think you need 8 more to feel love? it's time for you to see a head doctor.

and no, i don't think the duggans or any of the other fame grubbing baby makers should be supported by the government or sponsors, because it feeds into this insane baby lust that this country wallows in. why should some idiot and their spawn be treated as conquering heroes for simply hiring a disreputable doctor? but more, if i am irresponsible, why should everyone else bear the brunt of my stupidity? lets say i got drunk and got behind the wheel, and wrap the car around a pole. should everyone who lives on my block have to go to drunk driving classes? of course not. and this is the same thing. if they are going to be irresponsible-- doing something that any sane adult knows has serious, long term repercussions-- it is only fair that they should have to shoulder all of that weight.

and no, them damn babies ain't even half cute. to say otherwise is to give in to that same sort of baby simple mentality that worships nadya's irresponsibility. those children are premature, hooked up to machines, and not able to survive DUE TO HER ACTIONS. she --and all those other families deserve to be vilified.

[culturehandy]

Multiple birth pregnancies are dangerous for mother and child alike. Anyone who knowinlgy chooses to have 8 plus children without the financial resources? People can afford the fertility treatment, but then they can't afford to cover the costs of subsequently raising the children.

Playing the devil's advocate that I always do, why is it okay for someone to lay down tens of thousands of dollars to get pregnant, then suddenly the family (however you'd life to define family) realizes they can't afford to raise however many children are the result. I ask, does this not seem a shade irresponsible? I don't mean for the tax payor, for the doctor, I mean for the people who went into this knowing what the outcome could possibly be? Most people think very long and hard about say, buying a new house or a new car thinking about the cost of maintaining said house and car or whatever, but when it comes to possibly having 5 or more children in one pregnancy, then there is no thought as to what this could be.

it is my opinion that as usual, people (and I do mean this in general, it is not aimed toward this case in particualr) make decisions without thinking about the long term consequences, then when they getin over their head, instead of stepping up to the plate, they expect someone else to bail them out. The end result is one that is made out of poor decision making. This can be applied to anything from the Big three, to wall street, to this particular story to the Dugars. People are not making responsible, well thought out choices, the almighty dollar speaks.

[vixen_within]

"This woman knew what she was doing and I think she should be held accountable. I also think she is unfit to be a parent. If you are going to purposefully have over 5 children, you better damn well be able to support them without public assistance. This woman paid over six figures to have fourteen children and she gets FOOD STAMPS? This is not what assistance is for and her actions are disgusting, selfish and reprehensible."

Meh, so she has a sugar daddy, or she used her savings from her previous disability insurance. You can't get plastic surgery and IVF on welfare.

So she's selling her story. Would people be happier if she got money from 'public funds' or from book deals? If you think about it, there really is no way for single mothers to make money to support themselves that isn't unacceptable to a ton of people. "Writing a book? She should be taking care of her children" "On welfare? Why should I [because it's always personal] pay for someone ELSE'S kids?"

The reality is nobody supports over 5 children by themselves no matter how they are conceived. The Dougans have lived most of their lives getting aid from churches, friends, and the government. Where's that outcry and scrutiny? How about the McCaughy septuplets? They're being supported by the government and the public, too, as well they should be. Her situation really is no different, except for the fact that this is a woman out of wedlock having babies. All the other multiple-birth mothers were glorified in the news. Now I'm not saying what she did is responsible or that her motivations are the perfect ones, non-dysfunctional ones, or even that she isn't BSC, but the anger that this story generates is amazing in itself. Those other families couldn't support 6+ babies either. NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SUPPORT THEIR KIDS PROPERLY. But Nadya is the only one being punished.

The media spin on this has also been remarkable. Think of the spin if she had been a war widow instead of a divorced single mom, leaving as many details the same except for that one.

*-*
Nadya Suleman, widow of David Suleman, recently gave birth to octuplets. Nadya and David already had 6 kids via IVF, because they were unable to conceive naturally. Nadya had multiple miscarriages before settling on IVF. Sadly, David passed away, but Nadya lives his dream and hers. Over the last 8 years, she has had 6 children with her beloved husband via IVF. Because there were embryos still left in the vault, Nadya had them implanted to save them from destruction. Miraculously all 8 survived despite medical predictions that only 1 would. She claims that she and David always wanted a big family because they were both only children, and she couldn't bear to see a piece of him, or indeed any embryo, get destroyed.

Nadya is a professional student, who has been on disability for a long time for back injuries, and her family has generously supported her during her grieving. Her father is heading back to Iraq for his extremely lucrative job, so he can help support these children. Since David's death, Nadya and her children have lived with her parents in a small 3 bedroom house.
*-*

See the spin? She's still unable to care for the kids. She's still having 14 kids with a donor father. She's just this poor grieving widow, and the emphasis would not be on the "single mother incapable of caring for the kids", it would be "brave widow fulfills dream of large family, despite all odds". That's basically all the information we first received, with her being a widow, instead of a single gal.

How many REPORTERS would go further than this? The Nadya Suleman of my widow story would be overwhelmed with gifts and prizes, and be held in the limelight as a brave woman, only doing her duty by her dead husband. Instead we have the "divorcee, newly single, with 14 kids not by her husband, and no husband prospects in sight" who has been vilified.

Also why are people trying to shame her into NOT being delighted by the fame of her and her babies. What happy beaming mother wouldn't be? If you're into that, it's like the ultimate audience for your baby photo album.

I just saw images of the babies today. They're so tiny it makes me sad.

[stargazer]

i hardly see her as a victim of the media. i think her misuse of public funds, such as student loans and welfare assistance, lends her to the criticism every public person is open to when using government monies to subside a lifestyle she is not able to afford herself.

i stand by my previous declaration that the octo mom's decision is one of greed which is defined as the excessive desire for more than one needs or deserves. Saying we don't have the right to criticize her choice as a public is absurd. I think I have the right to say I don't want to give her money for her kids or her plastic surgery.

Her actions were so selfish it is mind boggling. She did not care how her actions would impact her parents, children, or others. We are in an economic recession and I was just flabbergasted to hear her say in last night's interview that she was using her student loans to care for her children. Thanks. Thanks for making possibly harder for students, especially those with dependents, getting loans.

I found this article interesting.

oh polly, i think we should definitely start a website to the human fund!

[pollystyrene]

Flipping through channels, the headline on CNN said "Octuplet mom speaks out against her critics: "Stop scrutinizing me!"



But gimme that book deal and tv deal and donate some money to me on my website.....

[zoya]

.... oh, she's already selling her story and photos. over here in the UK, the Sun (a tabloid) ran the photos first - they're notorious for paying top dollar for stuff like that. and I agree, I'm sure she's loving it.

[girlygirlgag]

This woman hired a publicist as soon as her anastheisa wore off. To say that fame and fortune by way of a litter of kids was not her plan, is naive at best.

This woman knew what she was doing and I think she should be held accountable. I also think she is unfit to be a parent. If you are going to purposefully have over 5 children, you better damn well be able to support them without public assistance. This woman paid over six figures to have fourteen children and she gets FOOD STAMPS? This is not what assistance is for and her actions are disgusting, selfish and reprehensible.

Unfortunately, we will be bombarded with this idiot, as her story is for sale to the highest bidder, and you better believe she is loving every minute of this.

I think her children would be better off in foster homes, than with her and her overworked parents.

[prophecy_grrl]

thanks for that blog post, christine. it pretty much covers everything I've been thinking, too. so glad to hear that poor Italian woman died before Berlusconi had a chance to inseminate her.

[culturehandy]

I don't think anyone here said she should be cut off social assistance.

And I do agree that this woman has been exploited, but with that said where did anyone say she had to give an interview to the news agencies, why did this have to go public inthe first place.

As for viewing this as a slippery slope, yes I agree, that it coould be. She just had no plan in terms of how she was going to raise these children. I would say the same if this was a family who had finanical means, only this time instead of the parents raising, they would hire nannies. What's the point in having children if you are going hire someone to raise them. Why not just not have the children in the first place. Finances do play a role in this, who covered the cost of the IVF when she is not working. I think that is a very legititmate question. You don't have the money to feed the children you already had, but you can afford tens of thousands of dollars on IVF. Further, anyone who has childhood issues and thinks the way to solve that is to have children, there should be some exploration as to why this happens. This is not an issue of what she did with her body, but the end result and the means by how she got there. The "ethics" behind the fertility clinic, whoever the mysterious financial backer of this is, and how can you not think of the children in this?


I'd feel the same about it if she were employed full time, had a spouse or whatever. She had 6 children already, why the need to have 8 more. Further, yes people in other countries do have many children, but we also can't forget that infant mortality rates, in say, Congo, or whereever, are much much higher than the mortality rates here. Further, when you have an agriculture based society, you have larger families to support the family farm or land or whatver.

Generally speaking, familiy sizes decrease as a society evolves to become a state level society, and when ir evolved to become an industrializexd nation. Children is industrial nations are no longer seen as a commodity.

[Christine Nectar...]

actually, THIS blog post pretty much sums up what i think re: news babies.

[Christine Nectar...]

I feel sorry for those kids. How long do we think it will be before children’s services step in and decide that those 14 kids are being neglected, and remove them to foster care? While I am decidedly pro-choice, and believe in “every child a wanted child”, I can’t believe any doctor would agree to IVF for this woman. And again, how the hell did she pay for it? I disagree however with those who say this woman should be cut off social assistance, since that will only make the kids suffer further.
I really wish the media and everyone would just leave this lady and her story alone. A decision to have or not have children is so individual, and each instance is unique (and complicated, as is bloody obvious here). Single mothers and parents on welfare don’t already get enough of a bad rap, and more attention to this story is not helping, it’s just blowing those issues way out of proportion.

As for the 60 year old woman in Calgary who just had twins, after receiving IVF in India, I say more power to her. While it’s not a decision I would see myself making at that age, I don’t think it’s the same as octo-mom at all. This woman and her husband have tried to have children for so long, and are as prepared as possible to care for their new sons. From the sounds of it, their decision to attempt IVF was an informed choice. The obvious concerns are their age and health, but really no more so than any other parents. There are so many kids raised by grandparents anyway, so how is this any different?

[prophecy_grrl]

GGG - sorry if my post was misunderstood. I was not trying to make excuses for the woman, but rather pointing out the media hypocrisy, which I still stand by.

I don't think there is any doubt that she is mentally ill, but I also think that she is a victim of a medical community who took advantage of her illness rather then getting her the help she needed. The media circus is really what I take issue with - the only reason we've even heard of this woman at all is because they thought they had a fun, cute story about multiple births and then found out it wasn't so sweet after all. Now they've taken untold joy at being able to stretch this story out over weeks and publicly humiliate this woman (since we all apparently love to watch sickos self destruct so we can feel better about ourselves).

I realize it sounds as though I am defending her. Or saying that her choices should not be evaluated, that it is perfectly reasonable to have 14 children you cannot take care of. I'm not. However, I call BS on all the think-of-the-taxpayers-and-children's-well-being moralizing. I don't think you can ignore the slippery slope of those arguments - how this "extreme" and "isolated" situation has been used to remind us that the state really ought to have *some* say in women's reproductive choices and be able to decide who is fit (financially or otherwise) to be a parent.

The fact is that there are untold number of people - children and adults, too! - in this country living in far worse conditions than this - yet we don't seem to have the moral outrage there. In a few weeks, we'll promptly forget about this woman and those kids.

[Divala]

Octo-Mom disgusts me, too. I don't know how her oh-so-awful childhood as an only child can be nearly as bad as being one of 14 f-ing kids and getting no attention whatsoever. I heard that several have disabilities, too. One has autism, 4 will probably have cerebral palsey, and another has ADHD. I thought the story was that she was implanted with 6 embryos and 2 of them split, making 2 sets of twins and 4 others.

But still, I know it isn't a popular opinion, but I really don't believe that a woman on public assistance should be allowed to have all these other kids that she obviously can't support. She won't marry the father, but still wants to have a ton of kids by him. She can't work, and even if she did, the daycare costs would be astronomical. And who's left to pay that? The taxpayers of her county that asked for none of this. It's going to eat up probably millions of dollars of taxpayer money, and all for some stupid woman's vanity. If she could financially and emotionally support these kids on her own with no help from the state/county, fine, but she obviously can't and won't. Personally, I'd vote for all these new babies to be put in foster care. I just don't feel that a woman's right to choose in this case trumps the public interest of not wanting to be on the hook for millions of dollars because of one idiot woman's choice. She's obviously not being responsible with her body, so her right to have more children should be taken away.

As my 6-year-old nephew would say, "that's just selfish and stupid." He's smarter than most people I know.